Reviews for "PLoS Biology"

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
PLoS Biology 8.0
weeks
13.9
weeks
n/a 5 4
(very good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Motivation: First reviews took too long to be communicated to me.
Second round of reviews was not really necessary; final amendments requested by editor would have sufficed. This was an extremely short paper.
PLoS Biology n/a n/a 9.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
PLoS Biology 14.9
weeks
14.9
weeks
n/a 3 5
(excellent)
5
(excellent)
Accepted
PLoS Biology n/a n/a 5.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
PLoS Biology 6.4
weeks
6.4
weeks
n/a 2 2
(moderate)
3
(good)
Rejected
Motivation: Process a bit long, apparently due to reviewer mobilization. Manuscript initially submitted to the journal three months before, and proposal was made by the editor to perform some experiments before sending it to review. Good contact with the editor though.
Some experiments or adjustments in the text could have been easily performed. The absence of proposal for revision is thus disappointing.
PLoS Biology n/a n/a 12.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Fair process. Proposition to resubmit if new data could be added regarding the editor's comments.
PLoS Biology n/a n/a 7.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
PLoS Biology n/a n/a 12.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
PLoS Biology n/a n/a 38.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)