2022.7 Submission
2023.2 Received first review comments
2023.4 Revision
2023.7 Pre-acceptance

The reviewers and editors are very professional, but the review process takes a long time, which may be due to the technical methods' innovation in this paper, making it difficult to find suitable reviewers.

(0) 讚！ | xxxx001

Before submitting, write a letter to inquire whether the editorial work is suitable, and then submit. After 3 months, the first reviewer will provide modification suggestions. The reviewer is very professional and offers many constructive opinions. After making the modifications, approximately 3 months later, a preliminary acceptance will be given. Then the editor will provide constructive suggestions to make the article more suitable for the journal's style.

(2) 讚！ | 画长空

2023.02.13 submit
2023.02.13 with editor
2023.03.02 Transfer Pending
The article on public health was deemed by the editor to be not in line with the journal's theme, and they recommended submitting it to iScience instead.
iScience has a high publication volume and expensive page charges. Personally, I feel it is somewhat similar to Scientific Reports under the neighboring Nature group, but possibly slightly stronger. I do not want to transfer it anymore.

(4) 讚！ | evayfang

How many days does it take to send for external review? I submitted mine 11 days ago and it's still "with editor". The website states that the average time to desk reject is 8.3 days.

(0) 讚！ | evayfang

2022.11.08 submit
2022.12.17 Rejected. Three reviewers, one minor revision, one major revision, one rejection, rejected by the editor. After discussing with my supervisor, it was found that the reasons provided by the rejecting reviewer were not substantial. Therefore, an appeal was filed, and the editor agreed to a major revision.
2023.01.16 Revised
2023.02.17 Rejected. Two reviewers agreed to accept, but one reviewer disagreed and the paper was still rejected.
Overall, it was not a good submission experience. Personally, I feel that this journal values the opinions of reviewers, but the rejection reason given by the first reviewer was baseless. The editor may have been afraid of trouble or had other reasons, and did not send it to the fourth reviewer for arbitration, which is a bit frustrating. This journal claims to be on par with Nature, but I have personally seen that the quality of articles related to my field is average. I will not submit to this journal again and wish it to improve in the future.

(0) 讚！ | ZJUCheny

Has already been adjusted back to the first district, it is estimated that there was an error in the initial statistics. If a journal with an annual average publication of less than two hundred articles and a first impact factor of 15 is placed in the third district, then it is indeed outrageous.

(0) 讚！ | huni

The upgraded version of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in 2022 is a top-tier area.

(0) 讚！ | 会飞的橙子

Hahaha, I also thought so when I applied, but just received the classification from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Zone 3, I'm so frustrated.

(0) 讚！ | merlin

By the end of the year, it will definitely be a secure and reliable district, no need to doubt!

(67) 讚！ | weichao