Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
3.3 weeks
3.3 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2020
Motivation:
We received two reviewer reports from Molecular Pharmaceutics. The first reviewer advised the editor to accept the manuscripts with minor changes. Reviewer two advised the manuscript should be sent to another journal. The Associate Editor, based on the two reports, decided then to reject the manuscript. However, both reviewers, specially reviewer one, had great comments on our manuscript's contents, which will improve greatly the quality of our work.
n/a
n/a
7 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2014
Motivation:
Although the paper I submitted was actually a direct response to a polemic attacking our own work quite personally, and published in the same journal, the response read "...your submission would be better suited for a more specialized journal". In other words they sought to block our side of the debate. After I appealed and pointed out that one could not BE more specialised than the journal that had published the original paper, I got "your paper in it's (sic) present form is a review of a review and is not acceptable as a scholarly review or perspective". In other words they do not want to hear criticisms of papers they have published if it does not suit their own views. I am utterly disgusted by them, and I would advise anyone to avoid submitting anything serious there. Ever.