The reputation has declined rapidly in recent years, which is closely related to its unstable quality. After carefully reviewing several issues, I noticed that some papers submitted by foreigners seemed to have very average quality, while those submitted by Chinese were much better. Why is there such a disdain for them? Could it be reduced to a circle of readership, where they keep producing outdated nanomaterials without any new discoveries?

(1) 讚！ | 顺子

This magazine only accepts animal experiments. Its impact factor used to be decent, but it has been continuously declining in recent years. The editors should reflect on this. It was originally supposed to be a top journal for nanotoxicology, but now it can only rely on reviewers to support its poor impact factor. I believe that more articles should be published on the mechanisms of nanotoxicity or the ways in which it differs from traditional toxins. Only by doing so can we become leaders in the field of nanotoxicology.

(5) 讚！ | 木木

The journal has a very high requirements for data, especially data on characterization, but for nano-toxicology, understanding characterization is the prerequisite for discussing toxicity. I don’t agree with some peers' comments that Nanotoxicology is forming cliques. There were two rounds of major revisions and one round of minor revision. The problems that reviewers pointed out had always hit the nail on the head, and it was a headache to write the response. The impact factor of Nanotoxicology dropped a lot in 2019, and the editorial office is also trying to find a way. As of 2020, the entire journal has published 48 papers. Although I disagree with this behavior, I can look forward to the recovery of IF in 2021. It is a fact that the IF of Nanotoxicology has been dropped madly over the past few years. Now only PFT is left as a major toxicology journal, eliminating the review category, and many people in the industry have turned to the environment field, but it feels that it is also a moment of popularity. The PhD would like to switch careers to do something practical. Finally, I wish everyone a smooth submission.

(0) 讚！ | 我不合适做科研

Review Speed: 2.0 Experience Sharing: Leaving aside the materials, the influence within the toxicology field cannot be compared with Archives of Toxicology and Toxicological Sciences. I don't know what the new partition is about. Only review journals are left in Zone 1, which seems a bit unreasonable~~~

(0) 讚！ | 仙灵俊驰

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission success rate: 25.0
Sharing experience: The editors of this journal are a group of people who study chemistry. There are very few who have a true toxicology background. They are more interested in material characterization. It seems they don't really understand toxicological evaluation and effects

(0) 讚！ | 飞龙烨烁

2017.8.8—9.27

(0) 讚！ | 青蜂侠

Review Speed: 2.0
Experience Share: 2017.8.8 - 9.27

(0) 讚！ | 马尔科姆哈灵顿

Review Speed: 2.0 | Submission Hit Rate: 25.0 Experience Sharing: Submitted on October 22, 2014, got the first review on November 24, requested major revisions, both reviewers mentioned that the article was novel and interesting, but additional experiments were needed. The revision took four months, and I added several key experiments as requested. Submitted the revised manuscript by March 24, 2015, and it was accepted on April 22. Comparing my paper and the paper of my senior sister (see previous comments for the submission process), I feel that nanotoxicology values novelty more. The issues raised in this article are less frequently reported in the literature, and the in vitro models used are advanced. Both reviewers expressed strong approval of the novelty of the article, and the requested additional experiments were considered reasonable. As for my senior sister's paper, the lab had already conducted some related research, but she covered a wider range, and the comparison of various nanoparticles was also thorough. Therefore, I recommend submitting articles that are novel and can suggest future research directions. Nanotoxicology reviews are relatively fast, usually receiving feedback within about a month. Mine should have been the same, delayed by two days, probably due to the weekend. Many articles take a long time from submission to acceptance, which is related to the long time needed for revisions, with major revisions normally taking four months and minor revisions taking about two months

(0) 讚！ | 长安湛芳

Review Speed: 1.0 | Submission Hit Rate: 50.0
Experience Sharing: Nano journals are always on the rise, nano materials seem really impressive

(0) 讚！ | 凌霄高洁

I don't know why it has dropped so much.But it should spiral up.Keep looking good.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

I'm not sure why it dropped so much all of a sudden. But it should spiral upwards soon. Still feeling positive about it

(0) 讚！ | 法慧彩云

Will it drop to 3 points next year? If it drops below 3 points, it will not be worth it

(0) 讚！ | 凌霄高洁

Feeling that the review process is slow, many articles take half a year to be accepted

(0) 讚！ | 是你的紫安呀

I feel that the review speed is very slow, so many articles can only be accepted for half a year.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名

The journal publishes nano-toxic articles for masters’ degree holders.

(0) 讚！ | 匿名