Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
98 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2023
Motivation: Internal organization seems to be in great need of optimization. Support either answers incorrectly or even after several queries not at all for weeks.
4.0 weeks
5.0 weeks
n/a
1 reports
2
3
Accepted
2023
Motivation: The editor did a fine job. However, the editorial support of the journal as well as the publisher (BMC) desperately needs improvement! Additionally, BMC insists on supplying the email addresses of each co-author just to afterwards bombard them with spam. Very unprofessional all around.
4.3 weeks
6.3 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
4
Accepted
2019
Motivation: The reviewer pointed out necessary changes to make my data more interpretable.
Drawn back before first editorial decision after 157.0 days
Drawn back
2017
Motivation: I submitted the manuscript on August 2016 and in the beginning of December I sent a inquiry to the editorial office since I had not heard anything. They sent me back what looked like a form letter saying they were going to look into it. It was concerning that on the website it still showed "under editorial review." So in effect they never sent it out for review. I never heard anything back so I inquired again the beginning of January 2017. They sent me back what looked like a form letter saying they were going to look into it. It was concerning that on the website still showed "under editorial review." At that point I explained if I didn't hear back that it was sent out for review I would pull it and submit it elsewhere. I never heard anything back and it still remained under "editorial review." I pulled the manuscript and have submitted it elsewhere. I have published in BMC Public Health and BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth and had good experiences. As a result of this experience I will never submit an article nor review for BMC journals or recommend them to my colleagues.
27.7 weeks
27.7 weeks
n/a
2 reports
2
0
Rejected
2016
Motivation: Very unprofessional way to handle the review process.
Extremely slow (and it is the second time I experienced the same in this journal)
They forgot about sending to reviewers after re-submission.
When I tried to complain by their mail-contact system it came always an automatic anwer with the same sentence....
n/a
n/a
26 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2014
Motivation: My manuscript was not found suitable for BMC Research Notes and the editorial team suggested to transfer my manuscript to Journal of Medical Case Reports. I agreed to the transfer.