fly bear 2023-05-04

The review efficiency is extremely high, and the impact factor will increase this year.

GXL@ 2022-10-02

PLOS ONE, a journal of the same level, has already been included in the watchlist of many institutions. It is important to exercise caution when applying for funding and choosing it as a representative work.

一碗月亮茶 2022-04-21

There are too many reviewers for Theranostics2, with 6 reviewers and nearly 60 review comments. It took three months for major revisions.

Teng Wan 2022-01-23

The internal journals have too many nepotistic relationships, whether it is in schools, platforms, hospitals, or organizations. The fact shows that some articles published by big bosses are also of average quality. Overall, this magazine is still good.

落寞大单于 2021-08-15

In the past six months, a considerable proportion of the domestic institutions that have published papers on this topic are national/provincial key laboratories, as well as high-level universities and research institutes. This shows that everyone has their own judgement and will not blindly follow the opinions of a few hospitals (non-academic institutions), let alone believe someone like you who is a troll.

落寞大单于 2021-08-15

I have read dozens of articles published in this magazine and have a few thoughts: 1. The circulation of this magazine is not small (at least 600 articles per year). There are not many reviews, and there are basically no "letters to the editor" type of articles. A considerable portion of the articles are contributed by foreign scientific research institutions and have an impact factor of over ten. This indicates that the main focus is on the quality of the articles. 2. After a rough calculation, a significant portion of the papers published by domestic institutions in the past six months are from national/provincial key laboratories, as well as high-level universities and research institutes. This shows that everyone has their own judgment and will not blindly follow the opinions of a few hospitals (non-academic institutions). 3. Based on my own submission experience, the reviewers are very professional and have increasingly higher requirements for basic research.

评123456 2021-06-11

Seeing that the submission result you wrote is "投未知" (submitted but unknown), I would like to ask why you still submitted it if it is a low-quality journal? If you have never submitted, then you are not qualified to comment on the quality of this journal. In any case, I believe your comments do not reflect the attitude of a scientific researcher.

评123456 2021-06-11

Also, I don't know where you got these two standards from? Are they based on expert consensus or are there articles reporting these two as the standards for evaluating a journal's quality? Just because you didn't publish in a certain journal doesn't mean it is a low-quality journal. If you feel it is a low-quality journal, please submit the remaining scraps of your "high-level masterpiece" from your laboratory to this journal and see if it can be watered down. I just don't know where you have sent your "masterpiece."

评123456 2021-06-11

You are a troll, aren't you? Your comments can be found on every webpage. If you didn't win after placing a bet, it simply means you didn't win. Why do you criticize so subjectively? How does it make you feel? You think this magazine is mediocre, so why don't you take out the articles you have written that are not mediocre and have a look?

张晓梅 2021-06-07

Actually, this is indeed a low-quality journal. There are two criteria for judging a low-quality journal: 1- If it is an international journal not hosted in China, we look at the proportion of Chinese articles. In this journal, the editorial board is located outside of China and most of the editors are from abroad, yet the proportion of Chinese articles surprisingly reaches 66%. 2- We also consider how domestic fund reviewers perceive this article. Unfortunately, if the National Natural Science Foundation of China were to write this article, it would be directly despised.

Furthermore, generally speaking, all published articles are praised. For example, in the comments section of PLOS ONE and Oncotarget, there are numerous comments stating that the journal has high quality, professional peer review, is difficult to submit to, and requires a year of additional experiments before acceptance.

子非魚 2021-03-03

The review speed is fast, and the reviewers are also very professional. The first review takes 2 weeks, and after major revisions, it takes 3 months to return. The second review takes 2 weeks, and after minor revisions, the paper is directly accepted. The journal is quite professional, with a high rejection rate for foundational articles. The editor-in-chief is very responsible and rigorous! The real-time impact factor has reached 10.08, and we look forward to maintaining stability and aiming for better, higher, and stronger achievements!

pigpigtong 2021-02-23

Submitted a review article. The first review took three weeks, and the second review took three days. The reviewing process was very fast. The reviewers' comments were also very constructive. If there is a chance in the future, I plan to submit to theranostics.

原心 2021-02-23

How long will it take for the status to change after submission?