Reviews for "Nature Methods"

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
Nature Methods n/a n/a 17.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2018
Nature Methods n/a n/a 5.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2018
Motivation: It is Nature Methods' policy to decline a substantial proportion of manuscripts without peer-review, so that they may be sent elsewhere without delay. Decisions of this kind are made by the editorial staff when it appears that papers are unlikely to succeed in the competition for limited space.

Among the considerations that arise at this stage are a manuscript's probable interest, level of methodological development and immediate practical relevance to a general readership. We do not doubt the technical quality of your work or that it will be of interest to others who wish to reduce the speckle effect during OCT imaging. However, I am sorry to say we do not think that the technical advances presented will have a sufficiently significant and immediate impact on a broader readership to justify publication in Nature Methods.
Nature Methods n/a n/a 9.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2018
Motivation: The quick turn around time, even though it was a rejection, was good.
Nature Methods n/a n/a 7.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2014
Nature Methods n/a n/a 13.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2016
Nature Methods n/a n/a 12.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2017
Nature Methods n/a n/a 20.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2017
Nature Methods n/a n/a 0.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2013
Nature Methods n/a n/a 10.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2015
Nature Methods n/a n/a 7.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.) 2013