Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
3 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2024
Motivation:
I sent to Sage Open on 28th January 2024, but it rejected on 31th January, 2024 without any reason. They rejected me so fast
21.3 weeks
23.1 weeks
n/a
3 reports
Accepted
2023
Motivation:
Before submitting my manuscript to this journal, I had heard from colleagues that the review cycle was lengthy, and I was a bit concerned, but based on my personal experience, it didn't appear to be that bad.
I had already submitted this manuscript to another journal, which had undergone revisions. Finally, because the journal is on hold, I drew back the manuscript and submitted it to Sage Open.
I had three reviewers, one of whom was quite experienced and gave many suggestions to improve the article's quality. One reviewer raised a few trivial questions, and another mentioned a few minor issues. Overall, the reviewers' comments on the article appeared positive, and I received a minor revision-no additional reviews.
I received the acceptance letter about two weeks after submitting my revised paper. During this time, I asked once on the status of the paper to the editor.
In summary, my overall impression of this journal is satisfactory, and I will most likely submit to the journal again.
I had already submitted this manuscript to another journal, which had undergone revisions. Finally, because the journal is on hold, I drew back the manuscript and submitted it to Sage Open.
I had three reviewers, one of whom was quite experienced and gave many suggestions to improve the article's quality. One reviewer raised a few trivial questions, and another mentioned a few minor issues. Overall, the reviewers' comments on the article appeared positive, and I received a minor revision-no additional reviews.
I received the acceptance letter about two weeks after submitting my revised paper. During this time, I asked once on the status of the paper to the editor.
In summary, my overall impression of this journal is satisfactory, and I will most likely submit to the journal again.
17.4 weeks
17.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Drawn back
2023
Motivation:
The journal needs to work in improve the duration until the final decision
86.8 weeks
86.8 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2020
Motivation:
The review speed of this journal is very slow.
11.1 weeks
11.1 weeks
n/a
0 reports
n/a
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 days
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 days
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
Accepted
2015
25.3 weeks
36.7 weeks
n/a
3 reports
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
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
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.