decision sent to author nature communications

Create an account to follow your favorite communities and start taking part in conversations. 0000008637 00000 n 50decision sent to authorwaiting for revisionFigure 2 Article proofs sent to author 4. isolera golv plintgrund waiting to send decision to author nature. 4;N>0TjAWSI#|9aJs]PZYp M#M%,f-);k'\C/*('O2 X(^tL4[msd\5n9cIh(?J0yVg5[5(z,|j}(mLR:V#P/lAD~"jhQT H+}0Z3Nj>!76{7#FMxgiqyym qo=CFf.oA:+ 6hlXT?:SNMZ/|)wj 44X7^tkp+:LL4 We understand that you have not received any journal email. Locate the submission in Submission Requiring Author Approval or Revisions Requiring Author Approval, and see here for more details. We found that 10 countries contributed to 80% of all submissions, and thus, we grouped all other countries under the category Others. Answer: From the description of the status change of the submission, it seems the manuscript did not pass the formatting check by the editorial staff and required corrections from the author. In order to reduce the variability in the institutional affiliations, we normalised the institution names and countries via a Python script that queried the API of the Global Resource Identified Database (GRID [19]). Hope everybody's doing well. In your 'Author Main Menu' manuscripts appear in different folders as they pass through phases in the editorial process: The submission is waiting for you to complete the submission (or revision) process. BMcG was the major contributor in writing the Background and Methods sections. In order to test whether two variables were independent, we used Pearsons chi-square test of independence and referred to the classification in [21] to define the strength of association. 0000002625 00000 n Journal-integrated preprint sharing fromSpringer Nature and Research Square, Share your preprint and trackyour manuscripts review progress with ourIn Review service. 0000014682 00000 n Uses field-specific PhD-qualified editors, editing to quality standards set by Nature Research. Reviewers have been invited and the peer review process is underway. Data from Web of Science was used; more information regarding the details of article categories and approach taken to derive the median citation can be found here. https://doi.org/10.1093/jole/lzw009. Vintage Cardboard Christmas Decorations, If that article is rejected, the journal name and public peer review timeline will be removed but the preprint and any versions of it, if any, will remain public. The results were significant for all pairs: group 1 vs. group 2 (2=15.961, df=1, p value <0.001); group 2 vs. group 3 (2=7.1264, df=1, p value=0.0227); and group 1 vs. group 3 (2=37.304, df=1, p value <0.001). This is known as a rescinding. This may be due to editor bias towards the review model, to a quality effect (authors within each institution group choose to submit their best studies under SBPR), or both. volume3, Articlenumber:5 (2018) Third review was never returned so decision was at least partly based on two reviews from the same discipline. Another report found that the authors of submissions to the American Journal of Public Health were in fact recognizable in around half of the cases [3]. If you choose to opt in, your article will undergo some basic quality controlchecks before being sent to theIn Reviewplatform. We found a small but significant association between journal tier and review type. This decision is taken solely by the editors, who are aware of the chosen peer review model as well as all author information. 9.3 weeks. This is because online submission has completely abolished the uncertainty of postal speed, an obstacle faced when manually submitting a manuscript. So, in October 2018, we added a new option for you when you submit to select Springer Nature journals. Submissions not complying with policy and guidelines receive an immediate (administrative) reject and are not forwarded to the review process (IEEE PSPB Operation Manual, 8.2.2.3) Authors are required to ensure before submission that their manuscripts are in full compliance with the magazine's submission policy and guidelines as outlined below. The following is an example of a poor cover letter: Dear Editor-in-Chief, I am sending you our manuscript entitled "Large Scale Analysis of Cell Cycle Regulators in bladder cancer" by Researcher et al. Article This work was supported by The Alan Turing Institute under the EPSRC grant EP/N510129/1. Papers from more prestigious institutions are more likely to be sent to review than papers from less prestigious institutions, regardless of review type. . Example: Blood Cancer Journal: Go to the 'Publish with us' drop down menu: Click on 'Submit manuscript' in order to be directed to that journal's manuscript tracking system: For the status of your submission to Scientific Reports,go to the Scientific Reports contact webpage for email addresses to determine which one best fits your requirements. . If you have previously submitted a paper to a Nature Portfolio journal and would like an update on the status of your submission, please login to the manuscript tracking account for the corresponding journal. 430,805 Altmetric mentions (2021), The Journal Impact Factor is defined as all citations to the journal in the current JCR year to items published in the previous two years, divided by the total number of scholarly items (these comprise articles, reviews, and proceedings papers) published in the journal in the previous two years. Results on the uptake are shown in Table5. Because the median is not subject to the distortions from outliers, we have developed and provided the 2-year Median, derived from Web of Science data and defined as the median number of citations received in 2021for articles published in 2019and 2020. Finally, we investigated the outcome of post-review decisions as a function of peer review model and characteristics of the corresponding author. All coauthors must agree to post a preprint and participate inIn Review. Nevertheless, the available data allowed us to draw conclusions on the uptake of the review models, as we detail below. It is calculated by dividing the number of citations in the JCR year by the total number of articles published in the five previous years. Finally, we associated each author with a gender label (male/female) by using the Gender API service [21]. While the metrics presented here are not intended to be a definitive list, we hope that they will prove to be informative. 2008;23(7):3513. For example, a report showed that 34% of 880 manuscripts submitted to two radiology journals contained information that would either potentially or definitely reveal the identities of the authors or their institution [2]. In Review. Using Pearsons chi-square test of independence, we found a significant and large association between country category and review type (2=3784.5, df=10, p value <0.001; Cramers V=0.189). How Many Seats Are Premium Economy On Emirates A380? We excluded data where the gender was not assigned to either male or female. On the other hand, an analysis of the Evolution of Language (EvoLang 11) conference papers found that female authors received higher rankings under DBPR [13]. 9. To post social content, you must have a display name. The underlying research question that drove this study is to assess whether DBPR is effective in removing or reducing implicit reviewer bias in peer review. 0000013573 00000 n Table13 shows the proportion of manuscripts that are sent for review and accepted or rejected with different peer review model and by gender of the corresponding author. 2019. On submission, authors should choose one or two referral journals, in the order of preference, or "no referral." A useful set of articles providing general advice about writing and submitting scientific papers can Manuscript # . The difference, however, is very small. You will receive more information via email from the production team regarding the publication process. The area under the receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve is 0.40. Accelerated Communications, JBC Reviews, Meeting Reports, Letters to the Editor, and Corrections, as well as article types that publish . However, when they communicated their decision to the Editor-in-Chief (EiC), who makes the final decision, it was decided to reconsider your manuscript. Until this is done, the decision can be changed. You can useIn Reviewto access up-to-date information on where your article is in the peer review process. This is public, and permanent. Webb TJ, OHara B, Freckleton RP. All papers submitted from January 2016 qualify for this scheme. Res Integr Peer Rev 3, 5 (2018). The dataset contains both direct submissions and transfers, i.e. Sodexo Disney Springs, The journal's Editorial team will check the submission and either send back to the author for action, or assign to an Editor. Because the median is not subject to the . Press J to jump to the feed. We investigated any potential differences in uptake depending on the journal tier. When the decision is finalized, you will receive a direct email with the overall editorial decision, Editor and/or reviewer comments, and further instructions. Posted on 31st May 2022 by 31st May 2022 by reparationstapet kllare Monitoring dairy cattle behavior can improve the detection of health and welfare issues for early interventions. Submission has been transferred to another journal, see How does the Article Transfer Service work for authors? and JavaScript. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988. A decision to send the paper for review can take longer, but usually within a month (in which case the editors send apologies). Nature. Ross-Hellauer T, Deppe A, Schmidt B. The final dataset was further processed and then analysed statistically using the statistical programming language R, version 3.4.0. Does double-blind review benefit female authors? Because we were unable to independently measure the quality of the manuscripts, this quality-dependent selection, if present, remains undetermined in our study. However, we did not find a combination of predictors that led to a model with a good fit to the data. The results on author uptake show that DBPR is chosen more frequently by authors that submit to higher impact journals within the portfolio, by authors from certain countries, and by authors from less prestigious institutions. Blank RM. A test for equality of proportions for groups 1 and 2 for DBPR papers showed a non-significant result (2=0.13012, df=1, p value=0.7183), and the same test on group 2 and group 3 for DBPR papers showed a significant result (2=40.898, df=1, p value <0.001). Across the three institution groups, SBPR papers are more likely to be sent to review. In order to measure any quality effect, we tested the null hypothesis that the populations (institution group 1, 2, and 3) have the same proportion of accepted manuscripts for DBPR manuscripts with a test for equality of proportions (proportion of accepted manuscripts 0.37 for group 1, 0.31 for group 2, and 0.23 for group 3). 0000003551 00000 n Download MP3 / 387 KB. We have informational videos that pertain to our Journal Suggester and Transfer Desk that take about five minutes each to listen to if you are interested in learning more about them. Springer is committed to your publishing success: If your research is of good quality, then it may be suitable for another journal. Did you find it helpful? The study reported on here is the first one that focusses on Nature-branded journals, with the overall aim to investigate whether there is any implicit bias in peer review in these journals and ultimately understand whether DBPR is an effective measure in removing referee bias and improving the peer review of scientific literature. The author is usually given a deadline of a few weeks to a couple of months depending on the nature of revisions and the field of study. ISSN 2041-1723 (online). One reviewer admitted the specific field wasn't in his/hers expertise. The WeWork Decision. We employed descriptive statistics for data exploration, and we tested our hypotheses using Pearsons chi-square and binomial tests. statement and . The status of the manuscript says 'Reviewers Assigned' for about 24 days. Here, we define the corresponding author as the author who is responsible for managing the submission process on the manuscript tracking system and for all correspondence with the editorial office prior to publication. At this point the status of your article will change to 'Completed' and no further modifications can be made in Editorial Manager. Especially the status 'Under review' encompasses many steps; while it may appear your manuscript is not progressing through the editorial process, a lot of activities may be happening during this part of the review process. Part of Jefferson T, Rudin M, Brodney Folse S, Davidoff F. Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies. What happens after my manuscript is accepted? By using this website, you agree to our DBPR was introduced in the Nature journals in response to the author communitys wish for a bias-free peer review process. Although each journal published by Cell Press is editorially independent, we have been using Editorial Manager, a manuscript tracking system that allows authors to transfer manuscripts along with any review comments they may have between Molecular Plant and Plant Communications.Should you have any questions about the . Our commitment to early sharing andtransparency in peer review inspires us to think about how to help our authors in new ways. 2006;6:12747. We investigated the proportion of OTR papers (OTR rate) under both peer review models to see if there were any differences related to gender or institution. Journal Issue available online . We tested the null hypothesis that the populations (institution groups 1, 2, and 3) have the same proportion of accepted manuscripts for SBPR manuscripts with a test for equality of proportions (proportion of accepted manuscripts 0.49 for group 1, 0.44 for group 2, and 0.41 for group 3). For translations into other languages, we recommend using YouTube's translation feature. (major revision)6 (revision)3 (Covid-19) 3. We aimed at modelling uptake (baseline SB) based on the following variables (and all their subsets): corresponding authors gender, the group of their institution (1, 2, 3, or 4), the category of their country (Australia, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Japan, South Korea, the UK, the USA, and Others), and the journal tier (Nature, Nature sister journals, and Nature Communications). Papers. . 2nd ed. As such, the decision to publish an article rests entirely with the handling Editor. If you require assistance, please scroll down and use one of the contact options to get in touch. Authors of accepted papers will receive proofs of their article about 15 business days after the decision is sent. Hi, it depends from the Journal but normally you can wait more days. Accessed 15 Jan 2017. Editors are always aware of the identity of the authors. 2016;1(2):1637. 2007;18(2):MR000016. How masked is the masked peer review of abstracts submitted to international medical conferences? Posted by May 21, 2022 upphittade katter vstervik on jag har avslutat min anstllning autosvar engelska May 21, 2022 upphittade katter vstervik on jag har avslutat min anstllning autosvar engelska This first-of-its-kind option, called In Review, brought to you by our partners at Research Square, makes it easy . Most journals assign a manuscript number upon initial submission and send an automated notice to advise you of the number (if not now, the manuscript number will be assigned when the first editor is assigned). The multivariate regression analyses we performed led to uninformative models that did not fit the data well when the response was author uptake, out-to-review decision, or acceptance decision, and the predictors were review type, author gender, author institution, author country, and journal tier. This is because the Nature journals do not collect information on authors gender, and thus, such information can only be retrieved with name-matching algorithms with limited accuracy. We then analysed the uptake by gender for the entire portfolio, as we were interested in finding any gender-related patterns. Share your preprint and track your manuscript's review progress with our In Review service. Plast Reconstr Surg. Each indicates a particular phase of the review process that usually happens in a certain order, however an individual submission can skip a phase, or return back to an earlier phase, depending on Editor actions. The Editors have begun a decision in the system. Bruce R, Chauvin A, Trinquart L, Ravaud P, Boutron I. Corresponding author defined. a higher likelihood for rejection) for double-blind than single-blind papers (p value <0.001, df=1, Cramers V=0.112 for first decision; p value <0.001; df=1, Cramers V=0.082 for post-review decision). 201451 XXXXX@nature.com Final decision for XXXXX. The full model has a pseudo R2 of 0.05, and the binned plot of the models residuals against the expected values also shows a poor fit. Updates appear on the public peer review timeline as the manuscript progresses through peer review* (*Not available on Nature-branded journals.). R-CAPTCHA. Each review is due in ten days, and many of them do arrive in two weeks. Check Status". Finally, we investigated the uptake of the peer review models by country of the corresponding author for the entire portfolio, using data on all of the 106,373 manuscripts. Posted on 31st May 2022 by 31st May 2022 by Make the correction notice free to view. GRID - Global Research Identifier Database. Some editors keep a paper for long time, more than 6 months or a year, without a decision and when send them a reminder message they do not reply or sometimes reply for the first time saying that . 0000011085 00000 n Regarding institutional bias, a report of a controlled experiment found that SBPR reviewers are more likely than DBPR reviewers to accept manuscripts from famous authors and high-ranked institutions [15], while another report found that authors at top-ranked universities are unaffected by different reviewing methods [16].