Follow @scirev on Twitter
Reviews for "Nano Letters"
| Journal title | Average duration | Review reports (1st review rnd.) |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (click to go to journal page) | 1st rev. rnd | Tot. handling | Im. rejection | Number | Quality | Overall rating | Outcome | Year |
| Nano Letters | n/a | n/a | 2.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2020 |
| Nano Letters | 2.4 weeks |
2.4 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 4 (very good) |
2 (moderate) |
Rejected | 2020 |
| Nano Letters | 2.9 weeks |
5.4 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 5 (excellent) |
5 (excellent) |
Accepted | 2020 |
| Nano Letters | 5.0 weeks |
5.0 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Rejected | 2020 |
| Nano Letters | n/a | n/a | 14.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2019 |
| Motivation: Rather long time for a desk rejection, a transfer offer was given | ||||||||
| Nano Letters | n/a | n/a | 12.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2018 |
| Nano Letters | n/a | n/a | 30.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2018 |
| Nano Letters | 5.6 weeks |
9.3 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted | 2017 |
| Nano Letters | n/a | n/a | 21.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2017 |
| Motivation: There were two different papers submitted. In both cases the time the editors took was about 3 weeks. In my opinion this is a bit too much time for "immidiate" rejection of a 4 pages letter. |
||||||||
| Nano Letters | n/a | n/a | 19.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2017 |
| Nano Letters | n/a | n/a | 9.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2016 |
| Motivation: Fast editorial turnaround. We felt the editors' reasons for rejecting were not unreasonable. | ||||||||
| Nano Letters | n/a | n/a | 8.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2016 |
| Nano Letters | n/a | n/a | 11.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2013 |