Reviews for "Statistics in Medicine"

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
Statistics in Medicine 13.0
weeks
13.0
weeks
n/a 2 0
(very bad)
0
(very bad)
Rejected
Motivation: The reviewer did not make any attempt to review the scientific argument in the paper but simply went on to find fault with the terminology used and express his/her opinion about how it was not possible to understand the paper. The review was simply about authors being unclear about the underlying models, being confused about key statistical concepts followed by a tutorial on the reviewers thoughts about the terminology used in statistics. There was no attempt made to objectively assess the proposal in the paper or to demonstrate if it works or not. There was no consideration at all of our methods or any specific pointer to the validity of our findings - two pages filled with non-specific opinions that could very well address any paper at Statistics in Medicine. The editors simply served as gate keepers for the reviewers. I would avoid this journal if you are presenting new methods and are not a famous personality.