Dur. 1st rev. rnd
Tot. handling time
Imm. rejection time
Num. rev. reports
Report quality
Overall rating
Outcome
Year
n/a
n/a
18 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2021
Motivation:
Thanks to the editorial boards for the very quick decision. They transferred it to an open-access journal (RSC-Advances). They could make a better choice, though.
n/a
n/a
2 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2021
Motivation:
Thanks to the editorial boards for the very quick decision. They transferred it to an open-access journal (RSC-Advances). Otherwise, they could transfer it to a better none open-access journal.
n/a
n/a
2 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2021
Motivation:
Thanks to the editorial boards for the very quick decision. They transferred it to an open-access journal (RSC-Advances). Otherwise, they could transfer it to a better none open-access journal.
5.0 weeks
7.4 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2021
n/a
n/a
6 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2020
3.0 weeks
4.9 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2020
Motivation:
The review process was quick. The editors and reviewers were fair.
4.4 weeks
7.1 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2018
Motivation:
The review rounds were (relatively) quick and the editor also responded quickly. Overall we're very pleased with the whole process.
2.9 weeks
3.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2017
3.9 weeks
4.6 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2018
Motivation:
The review process was quick and the comments made by the reviewers helped us improve the manuscript.
3.0 weeks
6.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Rejected
2017
Motivation:
While our manuscript was rejected, both editors and reviewers were reasonably fair and balanced, and suggested an alternative journal for publication. The manuscript was quickly accepted after transferring to another journal. Communication was quick and so was the review process.
n/a
n/a
4 days
n/a
n/a
n/a
Rejected (im.)
2015
5.0 weeks
10.0 weeks
n/a
2 reports
Accepted
2015