Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
8.9 weeks
8.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
2
1
Drawn back
2021
Motivation: Quality of reviews was averaged as one external reviewer was excellent, however, the second reviewer was very bad - their review contained errors, false information, no references to back up their comments and asked for additional information/data that was completely irrelevant to our study. The flaws in the second review were raised with the editor who refused to seek a third reviewer or investigate further. Extremely disappointed with the second reviewer and the editors handling of our manuscript. We decided to publish in another journal.
11.4 weeks
15.9 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
4
Accepted
2018
6.1 weeks
8.1 weeks
n/a
1 reports
3
3
Accepted
2018
6.1 weeks
9.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2015
45.6 weeks
45.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
2016
4.4 weeks
4.9 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2014
Motivation: Very fast and overall very good, though one of the three reviews was sent in a few days later than the first two reviews.
5.9 weeks
6.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2015
Motivation: The duration of the whole process could have been shorter but as such went very well and reasonably fast.