Reviews for "Nanoscale"
| 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 |
| Nanoscale | 56.6 weeks |
56.6 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 5 (excellent) |
5 (excellent) |
Accepted | 2019 |
| Motivation: Swift peer-review process and response by the journal editorial office. The constructive suggestions provided by the reviewers have definitely helped to improve the quality of the manuscript. | ||||||||
| Nanoscale | 6.4 weeks |
6.4 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 5 (excellent) |
5 (excellent) |
Accepted | 2019 |
| Nanoscale | 1.7 weeks |
1.9 weeks |
n/a | 2 | 5 (excellent) |
5 (excellent) |
Accepted | 2019 |
| Motivation: Very quick editorial decision. The reviewe were also quick and insightful. | ||||||||
| Nanoscale | n/a | n/a | 9.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2018 |
| Motivation: Way too long for immediate rejection | ||||||||
| Nanoscale | 4.7 weeks |
8.0 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 4 (very good) |
3 (good) |
Accepted | 2018 |
| Motivation: They took more time than expected time to accept the revised manuscript. | ||||||||
| Nanoscale | n/a | n/a | 6.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2018 |
| Nanoscale | 7.7 weeks |
8.9 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 3 (good) |
3 (good) |
Accepted | 2018 |
| Motivation: First review round was slow. 2 Reviewer had an opposite opinion. Mansuscript was sent to a third reviewer. After first round the manusscript handling was smooth. |
||||||||
| Nanoscale | 5.4 weeks |
6.0 weeks |
n/a | 3 | 4 (very good) |
4 (very good) |
Accepted | 2017 |
| Nanoscale | n/a | n/a | 11.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2018 |
| Nanoscale | n/a | n/a | 5.0 days |
n/a | n/a | n/a | Rejected (im.) | 2017 |
@scirev