Reviews for "PLoS Pathogens"

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 Pathogens n/a n/a 4.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
PLoS Pathogens n/a n/a 4.0
days
n/a n/a n/a Rejected (im.)
Motivation: Very poor initial assessment. It seems that the editor did not understand the main message of the manuscript.
PLoS Pathogens 5.6
weeks
8.4
weeks
n/a 3 3
(good)
3
(good)
Accepted
Motivation: The first round of reviews was fair and mostly constructive, the last round however was based on a reviewer who missed the point and required unnecessary work. The editorial team, otherwise very helpful and fair, should have stepped in at that point. In summary however, the manuscript was handled mostly fair and did improve by the review process.
PLoS Pathogens 5.7
weeks
5.7
weeks
n/a 3 3
(good)
4
(very good)
Drawn back
PLoS Pathogens 3.0
weeks
7.0
weeks
n/a 3 4
(very good)
5
(excellent)
Accepted
Motivation: The managing editor was professional, courteous and fair, the reviewers tough and demanding but the experiments they requested substantially improved my paper.