Journal Title
Scientific Reports


2045-2322 / 2045-2322
Aims and Scope

We publish original research from all areas of the natural sciences, psychology, medicine and engineering. You can learn more about what we publish by browsing our specific scientific subject areas below or explore Scientific Reports by browsing all articles and collections.

Scientific Reports has a 2-year impact factor: 4.380 (2021), and is the 6th most-cited journal in the world, with more than 540,000 citations in 2020 (Clarivate Analytics, 2021).


Engineering covers all aspects of engineering, technology, and applied science. It plays a crucial role in the development of technologies to address some of the world's biggest challenges, helping to save lives and improve the way we live.

•Physical sciences

Physical sciences are those academic disciplines that aim to uncover the underlying laws of nature — often written in the language of mathematics. It is a collective term for areas of study including astronomy, chemistry, materials science and physics.

•Earth and environmental sciences

Earth and environmental sciences cover all aspects of Earth and planetary science and broadly encompass solid Earth processes, surface and atmospheric dynamics, Earth system history, climate and climate change, marine and freshwater systems, and ecology. It also considers the interactions between humans and these systems.

•Biological sciences

Biological sciences encompass all the divisions of natural sciences examining various aspects of vital processes. The concept includes anatomy, physiology, cell biology, biochemistry and biophysics, and covers all organisms from microorganisms, animals to plants.

•Health sciences

The health sciences study health, disease and healthcare. This field of study aims to develop knowledge, interventions and technology for use in healthcare to improve the treatment of patients.
Subject Area


7.50 View Trend
CiteScore Ranking
Category Quartile Rank
Multidisciplinary - Multidisciplinary Q1 #11/134
Web of Science Core Collection
Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI)
Indexed -
Category (Journal Citation Reports 2023) Quartile
Country/Area of Publication
Springer Nature
Publication Frequency
Continuously updated
Year Publication Started
Annual Article Volume
Open Access
The Macmillan Building, 4 Crinan Street, London N1 9XW Tel: +44 20 7014 6879; Email:
Verified Reviews
Note: Verified reviews are sourced from across review platforms and social media globally.
The process of submitting this article to this journal has been extremely convoluted. First, there was the initial round of revisions, with three reviewers raising dozens of questions, requiring major revisions. After completing the revisions, we resubmitted the article and in the second round, only one reviewer suggested minor revisions, such as abbreviations. After the second round of revisions, which took about two weeks, the editor informed us that the reviewers were satisfied with the revisions, but the editor noticed some grammar issues that needed to be addressed before acceptance. So, we proofread the article and submitted it again. After another two weeks, the editor raised more grammar and other issues that needed further revision. We made the necessary changes and submitted it once again. About a month later, the editor informed us that they were seeking new reviewers, and invited thirteen of them. By this point, our patience had worn thin, so we sent an email requesting to withdraw the article (as it had already been six months since submission). However, the editor tried to persuade us, stating that they had found reviewers who were willing to review the article. So, we temporarily decided not to withdraw. After another two months, we received revision comments from two new reviewers, leaving us feeling frustrated and perplexed. We made the revisions and submitted it again. Then, it seemed like the editor was once again seeking new reviewers, and we haven't received any updates since then. Oh my, this has definitely been the most convoluted submission experience I have ever had. I have never encountered an editor who continuously seeks reviewers, and the suggestions from different reviewers naturally vary. The never-ending cycle of revisions is tiresome. It would have been better if they had just rejected it outright. This editor is truly unprofessional!
Save your luck, share the submission process. It was submitted around June 20th, and the editor took a week to find reviewers. There were two reviewers, and their feedback was received in mid to late July. One reviewer had a positive attitude but pointed out many areas that needed improvement. The other reviewer had a harsh tone and demanded significant revisions to the article's structure. After more than a month of modifications, the revised version was returned in mid to late August. The editor spent a few days reviewing it and did not directly accept it but sent it to two reviewers again (probably the same ones as the first round). One reviewer completed the review in a week, while the other took about two weeks. By September 18th, both reviewers' feedback reached the editor, and on September 24th, the decision to accept the article was made.

This article was previously submitted to several journals but was not accepted due to various reasons, wasting more than half a year. Only I know the bitterness I experienced during this time. I am grateful for the tolerance of this journal. I used to think that it was a bit mediocre, but this time, I could feel the reviewers' level of expertise through their feedback. Their suggestions were targeted and helpful for improving the article. Through my first article in life, I have gained some insights. Whether a journal is good or not depends on the overall environment of your laboratory. If your laboratory is top-notch, fellow researchers may look down on submitting to this kind of journal, and naturally, you may consider it mediocre. However, if your laboratory's level is average and you can finally publish one article in this journal through your own efforts, it is still a reward for your hard work. I wish you all good luck and hope you can be successfully accepted by a journal that matches your article's quality.

Add your recorded webinar

Do you already have a recorded webinar? Grow your audience and get more views by easily listing your recording on Peeref.

Upload Now

Become a Peeref-certified reviewer

The Peeref Institute provides free reviewer training that teaches the core competencies of the academic peer review process.

Get Started