2024.04.03 Submitted to Journal (formatting modified)
2024.04.08 With editor
2024.04.18 Under review (invited 5 reviewers, 1 accepted)
2024.05.06 1 reviewer completed
2024.05.08 Reject

(0) 讚！ | 蠢小葱

Too slow, it took 300 days from submission to acceptance

(2) 讚！ | 雨季

Submitted on March 3, 2022, major revision due on May 26, 2022, revised manuscript submitted on the final day of July 26, 2022, accepted on August 1, 2022, online two days later

(0) 讚！ | zzugzf

What happened later?

(0) 讚！ | 螳螂欣辰

1.28 Submission
5.5 Major revisions. Two reviewers, and both of their opinions are acceptable.
5.16 Returned after revisions.
6.20 Accepted.

(0) 讚！ | 努力向前

The novelty of an article may be assessed by searching for keywords

(0) 讚！ | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Maybe

(0) 讚！ | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Will the reviewers assess the novelty of my research based on the keywords I provide?

(0) 讚！ | Darlene Pepys

How do reviewers use keywords for peer review?

(0) 讚！ | 龙鳞孝礼

After the first round of revision, I have been in touch with the editor for a month now, but I have not received any response to my inquiries. What does this mean?

(0) 讚！ | 和同小哥哥

Do you need the entire film or can it be cropped? Planning to submit. Riverlord 2020-05-05 00:00:00 Post: Received on March 26th, still haven't received any feedback from them today! It's been over a month, no intention of publishing. I reminded the editor once in the middle, was pushed to Elsevier editorial department, and the editor said one week later... But it's been another month now! Has anyone else encountered this situation?

(0) 讚！ | 深渊含蕊

We received it on March 26th, but we still haven't been able to review the proof! It's been over a month and there doesn't seem to be any intention to publish it. We followed up with the editor once and it got pushed to the Elsevier editorial department. The editor said it would be another week... and now it's been another month! Has anyone else experienced this?

(0) 讚！ | 凌霄静丝

I fell into this pit too, this magazine is too slow, too slow, too slow; Submitted on November 1, 2019; Over two months later; Minor revisions in early January 2020; Minor revisions submitted at the end of January, under review again. Over two months later; On April 8th, it took more than 5 months before rejection. For those in a hurry, don't consider this magazine, based on my personal experience, the efficiency is really low

(0) 讚！ | 俨雅小仙女

I was also tricked by it, and review speed of this journal was too slow, too slow, too slow; 2019.11.1 submission; More than 2 months later, minor revisions were required in early January 2020; revised manuscript was submitted at the end of January, and it was under review again. More than 2 months later, it was rejected on April 8. It took more than 5 months. Students who are really anxious should not consider this journal. From personal experience, this efficiency was really low.

(1) 讚！ | 风神

Can we be co-corresponding authors? 
CYCY 2016-10-17 13:09:00 Post: Submitted on August 18th, the cover letter of the submission intentionally mentioned that this study was designed based on our review article published in ETAP. Under review on August 31st, first-round results were received on September 27th, and the editor made a decision the same day after receiving the reviewers' comments. There was only one reviewer, suggesting major revisions and adding a simple experiment. Took a few days off during the National Day holiday, came back and spent a few days doing the experiment again. Submitted the revised manuscript on October 12th, it was with the editor on the 14th, and on the 16th the editor directly accepted it. Submitted to ETAP three times, all accepted, and this time was the fastest in terms of duration. It is easier to get the editor's favor by first submitting a review, proposing ideas, and then publishing relevant experimental articles

(0) 讚！ | 两仪长喜

I can only say I am very angry. Submitted on July 2, 2018, it took six months and has been Under Review. It was extremely delayed, and the editor's attitude was terrible. I had no choice but to withdraw my submission. It has been a waste of time for six months, and I have never seen such a trashy journal. If you are not satisfied, you can just reject it directly. This dragging on indefinitely really harms people greatly. Urgently needed research friends, please handle this. The tragic history may have no successors

(1) 讚！ | 静依大叔

Submission on 8.31, revision due on 10.7. Five reviewers, one of whom rejected with a bunch of very tricky and harsh comments (peer enemies), fortunately the opinions of the other reviewers were positive. The journal gave a long time for revisions, with a deadline of 10.25 for resubmission after 60 days. Especially regarding the critical review, everyone understood that it would be tough. On 10.28, it was once again under review. Everyone was in despair at that time, because the second round of under review is really tough. The first round of revisions was very detailed, and many better journals would accept it directly at this point, but this one... hmm... well, regretted submitting to this one at that time, but was already committed. On 11.26, the second round of revisions was submitted. The editor sent the response to the previous five reviewers, three of whom replied. Two said that the authors had made very serious changes and had no more comments, one of whom had given a lot of comments in the first round and again suggested major revisions! I am more irritable, so at that time I was just like, "whatever." Who knows how many eye rolls were done when writing the response again at this time. Actually, I had no patience by this time, so I no longer tried to be tactful. I just said what could be changed, was changed. What couldn't be changed, just couldn't be changed according to their opinions. It was resubmitted in less than a week. Accepted on 12.18. Note that this was almost a month from the second round submission! In conclusion, this was the slowest journal our team has ever submitted to. For students in a hurry, don't consider this journal. Based on personal experience, the efficiency is really low. The editor is very serious, but seems to lack a bit of decisiveness. Maybe it's just my bad luck. Just for reference

(0) 讚！ | 洗髓碧菡

Requires very meticulous revisions. 5 reviewers. Too slow for graduating students.

(1) 讚！ | ada2019

Review speed: 6.0 | Submission hit rate: 75.0
Experience sharing: The article was accepted after four and a half months. It took more than four months for the first review in the management field. There was one reminder in between, but the editor's efficiency was still high

(0) 讚！ | Ward Owen

Must highlight it
158U8wl5156 (No nickname) 2018-02-07 00:00:00 Posted: Can I ask. After this magazine is returned for revision, does the revised manuscript submitted need to have revision marks? Or is the complete version acceptable? Please advise

(0) 讚！ | 飞龙烨烁

Do you want a layout fee? Just hit a piece. The speed is amazing. Received and online in two months. Very nice magazine. Luckily. This magazine has risen from Zone 4 to Zone 3!!!

(0) 讚！ | 玉女淑贞

Could you please clarify whether the revised draft submitted after returning the magazine must have visible edits or if a complete version is acceptable? Thank you

(0) 讚！ | 终幕芷枫

Review speed: 2.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 50.0 Experience sharing: Environmental Toxicology Research is a very nice journal for heavy metal kidney research. Reviewers are very serious and have a humble attitude when discussing issues with authors. I had a paper accepted in 2017 with a 2 and a half month review cycle. This year, the journal's impact factor has been increased. Lucky!

(0) 讚！ | 终幕芷枫

Have you ever written a reminder letter to the editor of this magazine?

(0) 讚！ | Steven Dick

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission success rate: 75.0
Experience sharing: Just got a paper accepted, so fast, accepted and online in 2 months, a very nice journal. Luckily, the journal has been upgraded from Q4 to Q3!!!

(0) 讚！ | 北海骏桀