Reviews for "SAGE Open"

Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
86.8 weeks
86.8 weeks
n/a
2 reports
0
0
Rejected
2020
Motivation: The review speed of this journal is very slow.
11.1 weeks
11.1 weeks
n/a
0 reports
n/a
0
Rejected
2019
Motivation: They are very unprofessional. After 8 months of revising paper we received email that they can't find reviewers. So, our overall experience is to avoid this journal.
Drawn back before first editorial decision after 304.0 weeks
Drawn back
2018
Motivation: We decided to give sage open a try after having good experiences with other OA journals. Three months after submitting and still no editor assigned, we emailed sage and got stock "be patient replies" after asking to pull the submission, they assured us they would find a suitable editor ASAP and asked us to give them one more week. They finally found and editor a couple of week later, a few months later we got reviews and a minor revisions. Four months went by after submitting revisions and not hearing form them. After enquiring they told us the reviews were back a while ago, and the editor was overdue but was no longer responding to emails. After another few months of being given the run around we decided to bull the submission. This is one to stay away from.
Drawn back before first editorial decision after 151.0 weeks
Drawn back
2018
Motivation: They had difficulty finding an article editor to handle the paper. I was also informed that they had difficulties getting suitable reviewers. They requested for one month to attempt finding an article editor to which I agreed. After more than a month and no subsequent notice from the editorial manager, I withdrew my paper.
52.1 weeks
56.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
1
1
Accepted
2015
25.3 weeks
36.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
4
4
Accepted
2015
Motivation: Although many of the reviewers`contributions were very accurate and positive, helping me improve my article, one of the reviewer seemed rather picky. Nevertheless, I tried to overcome any obstacles on the way and accepted to respond to their requirements, mostly because they were relevant.
29.6 weeks
29.6 weeks
n/a
1 reports
4
4
Accepted
2014
Motivation: The journal was not able to provide any updates during the 30 weeks the manuscript was under review. The review process seemed quite slow considering they claim to have a shorter review time than many other journals and have rolling online publication. The comments from the reviewer were helpful and the manuscript was accepted. The editor was easy to work with. I would consider using again, but don't expect an expedited process despite the online rolling publication.
19.3 weeks
26.1 weeks
n/a
1 reports
1
2
Accepted
2014
Motivation: We were satisfied that, after the disappointing first round of review (only one brief review), the revised manuscript was sent to two new reviewers who came up with more substantial criticism than the first reviewer had done. After acceptance, SAGE Open really did a lot of work on proofreading and correcting the manuscript (esp. the references section). Unfortunately, the whole process took a lot of time.