mish1987 2023-07-24

Hello, may I ask if the "under review" of this magazine means it has been submitted for review? Does it exclude internal review?

夏木 2023-07-07

It has been 7 working days since submission, and the editor has not been assigned yet, is this normal?

Doctor Qiang 2023-06-11

Submitted on April 25th
Sent for review on April 30th
Received reviewer comments on May 15th, major revision required, three reviewers, over 20 pages of comments, objective and constructive feedback, greatly improved the article.
Revised on June 7th
Accepted on June 10th
Overall, the process was fast and had high requirements for innovation.

JoeyGuo 2023-03-30

Submitted on November 22nd, the paper focuses on single-cell and wet experiments. A few days later, it was sent for review with two reviewers. After about a month, one of the reviewers withdrew the manuscript, possibly due to being outside their field of expertise. It took another week to find a new reviewer. The third reviewer took a month to review the paper.

On February 23rd, the editor provided major revisions, but in reality, they were minor. After adding a mechanism diagram and some discussion, the revised paper was sent back and accepted in just one week.

Overall, the process was very fast. Within a month of review, if it wasn't for one reviewer withdrawing, the first review results would have been received within a month. The questions and suggestions raised by the reviewers were professional and significantly improved the article's quality. Considering it is an 8-point journal, it is considered quite good.

旺子 2023-03-26

Two reviewers, major revision followed by minor revision, and then quickly accepted. The entire process took 5 months. Among them, the initial review felt quite slow, taking nearly 4 months.

undefined 2023-02-23

Submit for external review in two weeks, receive reviewer feedback in one month, and get rejected due to lack of innovation.

乐乐爱喝可乐 2023-02-10

I have been waiting for 10 days, and they are still assigning editors. It's so slow.

宇航员 2023-01-13

Need original data.

地中海三太子敖夜 2022-12-07

Accepted. The clinical RCT in the medical field was reviewed by seven external experts, including one statistician, in two rounds. The review process was very thorough, and after two major revisions, it was accepted. The first decision took 50 days, and the total time for the final decision was 163 days.

奈特 2022-10-14

Excuse me, are you a foundational article? The review period is so short?

地中海三太子敖夜 2022-10-11

The major revisions have been completed. The review process took 43 days, with 7 reviewers, and it has been quite helpful in improving the quality of the manuscript.

chanyimi 2022-10-06

Hello, have there been any updates on your side? I'm not sure if there are too many articles on IF that have caused a delay. It has been ten days since Editor Assigned, but there has been no response.

chanyimi 2022-10-06

My review has been submitted and has been in the "Editor Assigned" status for ten days now, without any response.

chanyimi 2022-10-06

Hello, do you have any follow-up?

地中海三太子敖夜 2022-07-13

I submitted once in 2019, submitted on 24th April 2019, and was accepted on 5th July 2019. It was a clinical observational study that went through minor revisions, taking a total of 2-3 months. The overall speed was relatively fast. On 6th July 2022, I submitted another article, which is a clinical prospective cohort study. The editorial review process took about 5 days, and it has just been sent for external review, so the outcome is still unknown. The overall pace is considered fast. Additionally, the impact factor (IF) has increased significantly this year, so it is uncertain whether I will be able to successfully publish.

Dr.Leon 2022-06-09

This is the first time I submitted to this journal, and I have been waiting for the editor to be appointed... I don't even know when the editor will be appointed!

爱科研的小仙女 2022-04-13

The reviewing speed is very fast, and the publishing speed is also very fast. It took about a month from submission to publication. The reviewers' comments are very fair and constructive, which greatly helps to improve the paper.