Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
10.0 weeks
17.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
3
Rejected
2025
Drawn back before first editorial decision after 321.0 days
Drawn back
2024
Motivation: After 6-month waiting, I started chasing the journal for updates. However, it was impossible to get in touch with the editors, all requests for update were answered by managerial team with the same text saying that the journal staff are doing their best to produce optimal evaluations, but that they understand the author's concerns and will escalate the issue to the editors. After 10-month waiting and 4 identical replies from the manager, the request was sent to withdraw the manuscript. The journal managers, again, responded that the staff are doing their best for the fair review, but that they understand the author's concerns, and issue will be forwarded to the editor. 11 month after the submission, a message was sent that in the absence of the feedback from the editors, we are considering the manuscript to be withdrawn even if we do not hear from the journal, and the following day the status of the manuscript changed for WITHDRAWN. No feedback from the editorial team was received.
Drawn back before first editorial decision after 212.8 days
Drawn back
2023
Motivation: If an appropriate reviewer cannot be found, editorial office could not solve the prolem.
7.9 weeks
19.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Accepted
2023
Motivation: The speed of review and reviewers' choice were good. There was an unexpected delay during review after first revision, which can be avoided. Otherwise the process was all smoother
45.0 weeks
45.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
1
Accepted
2023
Motivation: We received the first review nearly 25 weeks after the initial submission. When we asked the editor the reasons behind this delay, it was reported to us that they were unable to find appropriate reviewers. The editor and the editorial team were friendly and flexible. The first round of review was informative and significantly improved our manuscript. However, the second round of review seemed quite unnecessary as these things could have been addressed during the proofreading phase.We recommended that if you want to publish your manuscript early, try to submit it to another journal if possible.
3.6 weeks
5.9 weeks
n/a
3 reports
5
5
Accepted
2020
Motivation: Submitting my manuscript to Heliyon Environment was a great decision. The process was quick and and easy to follow. 3 weeks after submission my manuscript came already with the reviewers comments. The editorial team contacted three reviewers who did a thorough revision of my manuscript. After implementing the suggestions and corrections recommended the quality of the manuscript substantially improved. During the second round of revisions we had only minor corrections after which it was accepted without delay. I can say it was a fair revision process.
2.6 weeks
4.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
5
5
Accepted
2017
Motivation: The review comments were fair and relevant on our case. The journal process was efficient. Reviewing proofs using SkyLaTeX was particularly pleasant.