Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
7 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2023
Motivation: Their reply was quick, but no comments on our manuscript at all. It would be rude not to mention our manuscript contents.
n/a
n/a
5 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2023
n/a
n/a
17 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2020
Motivation: A very slow initial decision. I have published in this journal multiple times before, and the past handling editor was much better than this one, who did not catch the major points of this paper.
n/a
n/a
35 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2019
Motivation: A ridiculously long initial review step. There seemed to be some back and forth among the editorial staff. Ultimately, it was clear that they lacked basic understanding of the system, even though they've published on it before. It was very frustrating, espicially given the lack of expertise by our handling editor. Ultimately the paper was published in a better journal so it was there loss, besides time.
n/a
n/a
6 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2019
n/a
n/a
6 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2020
Motivation: very fast decision with several reasons and suggestions, this is really helpful
n/a
n/a
9 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2019
n/a
n/a
2 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2019
n/a
n/a
6 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2019
n/a
n/a
0 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2019
n/a
n/a
6 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2018
Motivation: The response was relatively quick (6 days). They seem to have wanted a more infection-related material (macrophage infection model etc) to "broaden the target audience" while our paper was more mechanistic/pure molecular biology in prokaryotes. They suggested to send to their sister journal Nature Communications instead.
n/a
n/a
6 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2018
Motivation: I was very happy with the prompt response, which allowed us to move on to other journals.
7.1 weeks
7.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
4
4
Rejected
2014
n/a
n/a
12 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2013
n/a
n/a
4 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2017
n/a
n/a
4 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2016
Motivation: Very fast editorial decision. Rejected based on lack of compelling conceptual advance.
n/a
n/a
5 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2017
n/a
n/a
4 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2017
n/a
n/a
16 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2017