Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2022
n/a
n/a
2 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2021
Motivation: Fast rejection of the presubmission inquiry.
n/a
n/a
13 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2021
Motivation: Rejected at pre-submission inquiry
3.6 weeks
5.6 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
5
Accepted
2021
Motivation: The presubmission inquiry is a great system to allow you to decide to format an article for a paper or not. This took ~3 days. During this time I already suggested reviewers to consider. After receiving permission to submit, reviews were rapid and helpful. Love this journal's turn around time!
3.6 weeks
5.4 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
3
Accepted
2021
Motivation: Good timing, responsive editors and great reviewing process but the strict figure, table and word count limits can go in the way of accurate scientific reporting and readability.
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2020
Motivation: Fast generic desk-rejection for presubmission inquiry.
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2020
Motivation: Generic desk-rejection for presubmission inquiry.
4.0 weeks
5.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
5
Accepted
2020
Motivation: Very smooth process and responsive editorial team, my favorite editorial process so far!
3.1 weeks
5.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
5
Accepted
2019
Motivation: The editorial process was professional and efficient - the reviewers gave important and insightful comments quickly and the editor was extremely responsive. I also think the presubmission inquiry is a very good way to test the waters without investing everything in one go and having to make substantial changes in formatting after a desk rejection. A wonderful reviewing experience.
5.0 weeks
9.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
5
Accepted
2018
Motivation: Publishing with Current Biology was a great experience. The editorial team was exceptionally helpful and very responsive. The reviews we received were critical yet thoughtful and constructive. Ultimately, our paper was available online within about 5.5 months from the original submission. I would definitely submit another manuscript here in the future.
1.1 weeks
6.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
2018
Motivation: The editor was extremely helpful and effective throughout the entire process. Our paper was initially rejected after one positive and one negative review, but we appealed the decision. The editor was quite welcoming and positive with our appeal and gave us every chance to state our case. After a long, hard-fought processes we were allowed to submit a revised version. After another round of major revision the paper was accepted. Altogether the process was very long, but this was due to the long appeal process, not the actual review process. The handling of the paper was quite fast and effective. The editor was very pleasant and did a great job with the paper.
1.9 weeks
2.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
5
Accepted
2018
Motivation: This was the fastest review process that I ever experienced. The presubmission enquiry is very helpful.
3.6 weeks
5.6 weeks
n/a
4 reports
4
5
Accepted
2018
Motivation: This was the best review experience I've had so far. After sending a presubmission inquiry, we got a positive response within a couple of hours. After submitting the manuscript, the review process was exceptionally fast (4 reviewer reports within less than 4 weeks). Based on the reviewer's comments, we could see that they were clearly experts in the field, and even though some of their comments were difficult to address, they were very helpful to considerably improve the quality of the manuscript. Moreover, whenever we had a question to the editorial office, they always responded within just a few hours. All in all, we were very impressed by the quality of the review reports and how the editor & editorial office handled our manuscript throughout all stages of the review process.
n/a
n/a
3 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2017
n/a
n/a
1 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2015
Motivation: Time-saving because of pre-submission inquiry and quick response. Very transparent and fair.
0.6 weeks
6.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
5
Accepted
2015
Motivation: Lots of back and forth with the Reviewers through the Editor, which made for quick assessment of key sticking points. Presubmission systems saves a lot of time.
8.7 weeks
10.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
3
Accepted
2014
4.3 weeks
6.3 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2014
4.0 weeks
5.0 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2014