Hello, how is the online journal going?

(0) 讚！ | 我爱科研呜呜呜

Posted on March 2nd, resubmitted on March 9th, under review on March 15th, reviewed on March 24th, major revisions on March 27th, revised on March 7th, accepted on March 13th. The review process was quite fast.

(0) 讚！ | 苯异硫氰酸酯

Which editor did you choose?

(0) 讚！ | 纯阳冰菱

A research paper on drug analysis, although the impact factor of chromatography B is not high, the recognition is still good.
Submitted on April 17th.
Received major revisions on May 26th, with five reviewers, and it was a bit difficult to address the comments from two of them.
Revised on June 14th.
Minor revisions on July 18th.
Revised again on July 22nd.
Accepted on July 26th.
Proofreading on July 28th.
Online publication on July 29th.
Overall, the speed is satisfactory. It is my first paper during my doctoral studies, so I am quite happy~

(0) 讚！ | dddddddd147

Do not accept

(0) 讚！ | 妙旋郎

The discussion section is the core part of an SCI paper, as it can demonstrate the breadth and depth of the author's research. Therefore, there is no specific word limit for this section. Different papers and authors will have varying lengths for the discussion section, ranging from a few thousand words to tens of thousands of words

(0) 讚！ | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

The discussion section is the core part of an SCI paper because it can reflect the breadth and depth of the author's research. Therefore, there is no specific word limit for this section. Different articles and authors will have different lengths for the discussion section, ranging from several thousand words to several tens of thousands of words

(0) 讚！ | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Is it necessary to have a lengthy discussion to demonstrate the author's reflection on the topic? Does it leave a good impression on the reviewers?

(0) 讚！ | 魂魄彦露

How many words should be included in a typical discussion?

(0) 讚！ | 魂魄彦露

2020.7.31 Submission;
2020.12.3 Three reviewers, major revision, returned on 2021.2.18;
2021.3.27 Additional reviewer, minor revision, requested to return on 2021.5.26.

(1) 讚！ | 春种秋实

The first review took more than three months. There were a total of three reviewers, two agreed and one disagreed. After making revisions, it was uploaded one month later and accepted eight days later. It is important to take each reviewer's comments seriously. It is a good journal and the first SCI paper of a graduate student, a great gift for the Spring Festival, hahaha.

(70) 讚！ | xxw2020

Submitted since September, returned for first review in December, major revisions, returned for revisions two months later, returned for second review in March, still major revisions, returned in late March, returned for minor revisions in May, returned a week later, finally accepted on June 28th, and finally cleared on July 7th, exhausted

(0) 讚！ | 东风向笛

Submitted from September, returned to the first trial in December, overhauled, returned to repair after 2 months, returned to trial in March, still overhauled, returned at the end of March, returned in May 3After minor repairs, I went back to repair after a week, and accepted it on June 28th. I finally finished the sample on July 7th, and gave me tired

(1) 讚！ | 591769130@qq.com

Can I ask how much the layout fee is?

(0) 讚！ | 六脉恨寒

The first review was slow, taking nearly 3 months, causing the graduate student to miss the scholarship evaluation. The second review was more efficient, completed within a month

(0) 讚！ | 易梦小可爱

was slower in the first trial, and it was nearly 3 months after the trial. The graduate student missed the scholarship.The second trial is okay, within a month.

(0) 讚！ | 雾里看花

The submission was made on July 21, 2017, and on the 22nd it was with the editor. On July 7th, it was rejected due to language issues, with the comment "Reject - Language." This is the second submission rejected by Journal B. The last time it was rejected for too much repetition, and this time it was due to language issues. Comrades, should I revise the language and resubmit to this journal, or try my luck with another journal? Thank you

(0) 讚！ | 雾都南香

Review speed: 2.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 50.0
Experience sharing: Although the paper was rejected, I still want to share my experience. The review speed was quite good, with two reviewers, one recommending rejection and one suggesting revisions. After evaluating, the editor Ping Li (sounds like a Chinese name?) decided to reject the paper due to lack of innovation. However, the comments from the reviewers were very constructive, so I made the revisions and resubmitted to JPBA, where it has been accepted

(0) 讚！ | 长安歆艺

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 50.0
Experience sharing: Compared to Layer A, the requirements for innovation are not as high. I recently had an article accepted, and the first review was quite fast, about a month. After revisions, it was accepted within a few days

(0) 讚！ | Susie Jenny

Review speed: 2.0
Experience sharing: I am really annoyed about this journal in my heart. I was told that my direction did not match when I submitted to JCA before, and I accepted it. My work is more inclined towards sample pretreatment and analytical testing. Then I submitted to JCB, which initially went smoothly. It was sent out for external review, and I waited for almost a month. The results came back, but only one of the three reviewers responded. This reviewer did not know the situation and directly said that they felt my direction did not match the journal, without providing any review comments. They suggested rejection. And that's it, the editor did not find another reviewer or follow up, and just rejected my submission, saying that my direction did not match. When I saw this result, all I could do was sigh. It's really irresponsible

(0) 讚！ | 洗髓鸿卓

For this journal, my heart is really awkward. Before I selectd for JCA, I didn’t agree with the direction. I also recognized that I am more inclined to pre-sample processing and analysis, and then selectd.JCB, it was quite smooth at the beginning, sent out for the external trial, and then waited for almost a month, the result came back, only one of the three reviewers returned, and then the reviewer did not know the situation, just sayI feel that my direction does not match this journal. I don’t have any review opinions. I suggest rejection of the draft. Then, in this way, the editors have not found anyone and they have no control. I directly refused to say that I am inconsistent with me.Going, seeing this result, I can only swear, really irresponsible.

(3) 讚！ | Anonymous

Review speed: 3.0 Experience sharing: Initially submitted to Journal A and was rejected, then submitted to Journal B. It took 3 months from submission to acceptance, with one major revision and one minor revision. Two reviewers gave thorough feedback and the manuscript was accepted after making the requested changes

(0) 讚！ | Susie Jenny

Review speed: 2.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 50.0
Sharing experience: This is my first submission to this journal, focusing on establishing methodology. I followed the guidelines from the FDA. It took 3 months from submission to acceptance, with detailed and responsible feedback from one reviewer and the editor-in-chief

(0) 讚！ | 小曼文吖

It's okay, but not that great

(0) 讚！ | 凌霄高洁

Review speed: 1.0 Experience sharing: A very speedy journal. Submitted in July, feedback for minor revisions was received 20 days after submission. Revised manuscript was accepted 2 days after resubmission (30th day in total), and it was published online in early September, with the print edition out on October 1st

(0) 讚！ | 凌霄高洁