Submitted on 16th January 2024, the manuscript was held by the editor for 30 days before being sent for review on 14th February. One reviewer accepted the task quickly, while the other took 10 days to agree to review. After 3 weeks, on 17th March, the review comments were provided. With few comments and no requirement for major experiments, the revisions were completed in 3 days. Another reviewer accepted the task within 2 days, while the other took 10 days to accept. The second review was completed after another 3 weeks on 17th April, with review comments provided on 20th April: the first reviewer accepted the manuscript, while the second reviewer suggested minor revisions, with a total of 4 suggestions, including one requesting language editing by a native English speaker. The team responded to the language issues within 2 days by revising the manuscript thoroughly, stating that they do not seek English editing services and do not require native English speakers to polish the language, and requesting the editor to evaluate whether the language quality meets the journal's requirements. It was originally thought that the manuscript would not be sent for external review, and could be accepted based on their own judgment. However, after holding the manuscript for 3 days, the editor sent it for external review by two more reviewers. One of them accepted the task quickly, while the other reviewer likely refused (never accepted the task). After 3 weeks, the reviewers submitted their comments on 25th May, and on 29th May the editor sent a letter agreeing to accept the manuscript

(0) 讚！ | 白发阿叔

2024-02-23 18:00 Submitted to Journal
2024-02-24 22:00 Submissions Sent Back to Author, stating that the conflict of interest statement needs to be downloaded from Elsevier version
2024-02-24 23:30 Submitted to Journal
2024-03-04 18:00 With Editor
2024-03-04 20:30 Under Review, during which the progress of the Elsevier WeChat account manuscript cannot be queried
2024-03-18 18:30 Required Reviews Completed
2024-03-21 00:00 Decision in Process
2024-03-21 18:00 Major revision given 3 weeks, only to find out there are 3 reviewers
2024-04-09 With Editor
2024-04-10 Under Review, the progress of the Elsevier WeChat account manuscript can be queried
2024-04-29 Woke up in the morning, Required Reviews Completed, and then in the afternoon, Accept

(0) 讚！ | 这样子吐舌头

How many reviewers will your article go through?

(0) 讚！ | 通背俊智

It's the same situation, but it happened to me last May or June of last year

(0) 讚！ | 宫古夏真

The same experience, submitted on January 23, 23 years ago, and rejected on February 20, 24, claiming that they could not find a reviewer

(0) 讚！ | 明昊小郎君

May I ask how long it will take for the publication to be released after being hired by the author?

(0) 讚！ | xuex

Submitted on December 15, 23, quickly under review. Then on February 8, 24, received an email saying they couldn't find reviewers and rejected it

(0) 讚！ | 紫霞凯唱

Fast Review, High Efficiency
Submitted on 2023-10-16
Accepted on 2024-01-03
Request for additional experiments from external reviewers, given 25 days to complete, otherwise it may be faster

(0) 讚！ | Jason

The theory is that whenever I could receive the UR email, the track email would arrive on the same day. However, I have not been able to receive the track email afterwards

(0) 讚！ | Sibyl Hubbard

The reviewers requested it, so we need to submit it. If they didn't request it, then it's not necessary

(0) 讚！ | Nicole Bruce

May I know how long it takes to receive the track email? It has been under review for several days and I still haven't received it

(0) 讚！ | 璃月偲偲

Can you please provide a detailed process?

(0) 讚！ | 璃月偲偲

Research focus: Toxicology
Experience sharing: Submitted at the end of May, accepted at the beginning of September. Revised three times in total. The first round of peer review took over a month, while the later two rounds were completed in about half a month each. A lot of additional experiments were conducted. The key is to respond diligently, providing detailed references or conducting additional experiments to address the reviewers' comments. PS: Encountered a scare when the tracking system suddenly couldn't retrieve the progress of the submitted article

(0) 讚！ | Sibyl Hubbard

Review Speed: 2.0 | Submission Acceptance Rate: 50.0
Research Focus: Anti-tumor experience sharing
Submitted in April, accepted in August, had a change of reviewers halfway through. Thought the journal editors were nice, and the journal was rigorous and responsible

(0) 讚！ | 玉萧开心

Review speed: 12.0 | Submission hit rate: 25.0
Research focus: Pharmacology 
Experience sharing: Make sure to answer the reviewer's questions properly

(0) 讚！ | 黑山端雅

Returned for revision, took four months for revision, was directly rejected. The reason for rejection is completely unreasonable. This is the first time I have encountered such a magazine, so please be cautious when submitting

(36) 讚！ | daaaaaaa

So, should we submit the original data?

(0) 讚！ | Caroline Patrick

It has been 3 months since my second review, but there has been no response after reminding

(0) 讚！ | 黑山端雅

Focused research area: Pharmacology sharing experience: Initial review took 6 months, with major revisions requested by the reviewers. It has been 3 months since the second review and we still haven't heard back. What should we do?

(0) 讚！ | 黑山端雅

Review speed: 2.0
Emphasis on research direction: Anti-tumor
Experience sharing: It has been over a month since the second review, I'm hesitant whether I should urge the manuscript or not...but I'm afraid of rejection

(0) 讚！ | 玉萧开心

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 75.0
Research focus: Toxicology; Cell toxicity
Experience sharing: It took about two months from submission to acceptance, which was quite fast. As long as you carefully revise according to the reviewers' comments, there shouldn't be any major issues. While original data is not mandatory, reviewers requested it to be submitted as supplementary files

(0) 讚！ | Nicole Bruce

Is the link working now?

(0) 讚！ | 擒龙怜岚

Review Speed: 1.0 
Research Focus: Toxicology
Experience Sharing: Editor-friendly, long review period with most time spent on the reviewer's end, just answer seriously. The WB original figure journal did not request it, but the last reviewer requested the original figure during the last review, so I submitted it once. If the reviewer does not request it, there should be no need to provide it when submitting the manuscript

(0) 讚！ | Sibyl Hubbard

Could you please share the submission guidelines? The link on the official website has been inaccessible

(0) 讚！ | 法慧春雷

Can you share the author instructions? Why can't I open the author instructions on the official website?

(0) 讚！ | 法慧春雷