decision sent to author nature communications

We then studied the manuscripts editorial outcome in relation to review model and authors characteristics. The multivariate regression analyses we performed led to uninformative models that did not fit the data well when the response was author uptake, out-to-review decision, or acceptance decision, and the predictors were review type, author gender, author institution, author country, and journal tier. The motivation behind Nature Communications is to provide authors with more choice; both in terms of where they publish, and what access model they want for their papers.At present NPG does not provide a rapid publishing opportunity for authors with high-quality specialist work within the Nature branded titles. Effect of blinded peer review on abstract acceptance. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01102.x. . Another report found that the authors of submissions to the American Journal of Public Health were in fact recognizable in around half of the cases [3]. In order to measure any quality effect, we tested the null hypothesis that the populations (institution group 1, 2, and 3) have the same proportion of accepted manuscripts for DBPR manuscripts with a test for equality of proportions (proportion of accepted manuscripts 0.37 for group 1, 0.31 for group 2, and 0.23 for group 3). Which proportions of papers are sent out to review under SBPR and DBPR? So, in October 2018, we added a new option for you when you submit to select Springer Nature journals. Because of the small size of the data set for accepted papers and of the lack of an independent measure for the quality of the manuscripts, we could not draw firm conclusions on the existence of implicit bias and on the effectiveness of DBPR in reducing or removing it. The EiC may have seen merits in your paper after all (or a fit, if that was the issue). We also performed logistic regression modelling with author update, out-to-review, and acceptance as response, and journal tier, author gender, author country, and institution as predictors. Between September 2017 and June 2020, Nature Communications offered authors the option to list the preprints of papers hosted on any community-recognised platform and undergoing peer review. 00ple`a`0000r9%_bxbZqsaa`LL@` N endstream endobj 53 0 obj 142 endobj 11 0 obj << /Type /Page /Parent 6 0 R /Resources 12 0 R /Contents [ 24 0 R 28 0 R 30 0 R 32 0 R 34 0 R 36 0 R 38 0 R 40 0 R ] /MediaBox [ 0 0 612 792 ] /CropBox [ 0 0 612 792 ] /Rotate 0 >> endobj 12 0 obj << /ProcSet [ /PDF /Text /ImageC /ImageI ] /Font << /TT2 18 0 R /TT4 16 0 R /TT6 14 0 R /TT8 15 0 R /TT9 25 0 R >> /XObject << /Im1 51 0 R >> /ExtGState << /GS1 44 0 R >> /ColorSpace << /Cs6 22 0 R /Cs8 21 0 R >> >> endobj 13 0 obj << /Type /FontDescriptor /Ascent 905 /CapHeight 0 /Descent -211 /Flags 96 /FontBBox [ -517 -325 1082 998 ] /FontName /JEGBJH+Arial,Italic /ItalicAngle -15 /StemV 0 /FontFile2 45 0 R >> endobj 14 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /TrueType /FirstChar 32 /LastChar 117 /Widths [ 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 191 0 0 0 0 0 0 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 722 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 556 0 0 0 556 0 0 0 0 0 0 222 0 0 0 0 0 333 0 278 556 ] /Encoding /WinAnsiEncoding /BaseFont /JEGBJH+Arial,Italic /FontDescriptor 13 0 R >> endobj 15 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /TrueType /FirstChar 32 /LastChar 121 /Widths [ 278 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 278 333 278 0 0 556 556 556 556 556 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 722 722 722 722 667 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 833 0 0 667 0 0 667 611 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 556 611 556 611 556 333 611 611 278 0 0 278 889 611 611 611 0 389 556 333 611 0 0 0 556 ] /Encoding /WinAnsiEncoding /BaseFont /JEGBLI+Arial,Bold /FontDescriptor 20 0 R >> endobj 16 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /TrueType /FirstChar 32 /LastChar 122 /Widths [ 278 0 0 0 0 0 667 191 333 333 0 0 278 333 278 278 556 556 556 556 0 556 556 556 0 556 278 278 0 0 0 0 0 667 667 722 722 667 611 778 0 278 500 0 556 833 722 0 667 0 722 667 611 0 0 944 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 556 556 500 556 556 278 556 556 222 222 500 222 833 556 556 556 556 333 500 278 556 500 722 500 500 500 ] /Encoding /WinAnsiEncoding /BaseFont /JEGBJF+Arial /FontDescriptor 19 0 R >> endobj 17 0 obj << /Type /FontDescriptor /Ascent 891 /CapHeight 0 /Descent -216 /Flags 34 /FontBBox [ -568 -307 2000 1007 ] /FontName /JEGBIE+TimesNewRoman /ItalicAngle 0 /StemV 0 /FontFile2 43 0 R >> endobj 18 0 obj << /Type /Font /Subtype /TrueType /FirstChar 32 /LastChar 32 /Widths [ 250 ] /Encoding /WinAnsiEncoding /BaseFont /JEGBIE+TimesNewRoman /FontDescriptor 17 0 R >> endobj 19 0 obj << /Type /FontDescriptor /Ascent 905 /CapHeight 718 /Descent -211 /Flags 32 /FontBBox [ -665 -325 2000 1006 ] /FontName /JEGBJF+Arial /ItalicAngle 0 /StemV 94 /XHeight 515 /FontFile2 42 0 R >> endobj 20 0 obj << /Type /FontDescriptor /Ascent 905 /CapHeight 718 /Descent -211 /Flags 32 /FontBBox [ -628 -376 2000 1010 ] /FontName /JEGBLI+Arial,Bold /ItalicAngle 0 /StemV 133 /FontFile2 50 0 R >> endobj 21 0 obj [ /Indexed 22 0 R 255 41 0 R ] endobj 22 0 obj [ /ICCBased 49 0 R ] endobj 23 0 obj 1151 endobj 24 0 obj << /Filter /FlateDecode /Length 23 0 R >> stream And here is a list of journals currently onIn Review. Results on the uptake are shown in Table5. and JavaScript. making DBPR compulsory to accelerate data collection and remove potential bias against the review model. To obtain The journal Immediacy Index indicates how quickly articles in a journal are cited. We understand that you have not received any journal email. Transfer of papers between Cell Press journals and Molecular Plant. Editors need to identify, invite and get (often two or more) reviewers to agree to review. :t]1:oFeU2U-:T7OQoh[%;ca wX~2exXOI[u:?=pXB0X'ixsv!5}eY//(4sx}&pYoIk=mK ZE 0000047805 00000 n . If an author believes the decision regarding their manuscript was affected by a publication ethics breach, . Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0049-z, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0049-z. California Privacy Statement, Data includes 128,454 manuscripts received between March 2015 and February 2017 by 25 Nature-branded journals. We considered using citations as a proxy for the quality of published papers; however, this would have limited the dataset to the small number of published articles that have had time to accrue citations, given the low acceptance rate of the journals considered, and the fact that the dataset is recent in relation to when DBPR was introduced at the Nature journals. 2009;4(1):624. Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. 1 Answer to this question. LZ. Nature Communications: n/a: n/a: 6.0 days: n/a: n/a: n/a: Rejected (im.) The outcome both at first decision and post review is significantly more negative (i.e. . Double-blind peer review has been proposed as a possible solution to avoid implicit referee bias in academic publishing. If you have previously submitted a paper to a Nature Portfolio journal and would like an update on the status of your submission, please login to the manuscript tracking account for the corresponding journal. 9.3 weeks. How do I check the status of my manuscript? ->Editor assigned->Manuscript under consideration->Editor Decision StartedDecision sent to author->Waiting for revision Original letter from Ben Cravatt in early 2000 after our meeting at UCSF when he sent me a sample of his FP-biotin probe to test in my laboratory. More information regarding the approach taken to derive the median citation can be found here. Editorial contacts can be found by clicking on the "Help & support" button under the "For Authors" section of the journal's homepage as listed on SpringerLink. Submissions not complying with policy and guidelines receive an immediate (administrative) reject and are not forwarded to the review process (IEEE PSPB Operation Manual, 8.2.2.3) Authors are required to ensure before submission that their manuscripts are in full compliance with the magazine's submission policy and guidelines as outlined below. Submission Experiences Duration from Submission to the First Editorial Decision How many days did the entire process take? 9 days How many days did the entire process take? how to pronounce dandelion witcher. 2000;90(4):71541. On this page you will find a suite of citation-based metrics for Nature Communications which provides an overview of this journal. For the sake of completeness, Table8 includes the number and percentages of rejected vs. out-to-review manuscripts for which the gender of the corresponding author was male, female, or NA. The final dataset was further processed and then analysed statistically using the statistical programming language R, version 3.4.0. 0000008659 00000 n Download MP3 / 387 KB. Journals can customize the wording of status terms. This study provides insight on authors behaviour when submitting to high-impact journals. 'Completed - Accept'. The aims of this study are to analyse the demographics of corresponding authors choosing double-blind peer review and to identify differences in the editorial outcome of manuscripts depending on their review model. We investigated the uptake of double-blind review in relation to journal tier, as well as gender, country, and institutional prestige of the corresponding author. 0000055535 00000 n 0000004476 00000 n In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles Some research has not found conclusive results [6, 7], demonstrating the need for further large-scale systematic analyses spanning over journals across the disciplinary spectrum. Tulare Ca Obituaries, Unfortunately, in light of the serious concerns raised by the referees, I regret that our decision must be negative, and we are unable to offer to publish your manuscript in Nature Communications.' decision sent to author nature communications posted by Manuscript then goes into said editor's pile, and waits until it gets to the front of the line. In order to see if institutional prestige played a role in the choice of review type by authors, we analysed the uptake by institution group for the entire portfolio. This might be due to referee bias against review model, or to a lower quality of DBPR papers, or both. Across the three institution groups, SBPR papers are more likely to be sent to review. Vintage Cardboard Christmas Decorations, . This study is the first one that analyses and compares the uptake and outcome of manuscripts submitted to scientific journals covering a wide range of disciplines depending on the review model chosen by the author (double-blind vs. single-blind peer review). After peer review, a decision of accept, reject, or revision is made on the basis of the reviewers comments and the judgment of the editor. We investigated the relationship between review type and institutional prestige (as measured by the institution groups) by testing the null hypothesis that the review type is independent from prestige. Get Scientific Editing. When analysing uptake data by journal tier, we have included both direct submissions and transfers incoming to each journal group, for a total of 128,457 manuscripts that were submitted to one of the 25 Nature-branded journals. Share your preprint and track your manuscript's review progress with our In Review service. These reviewers then need sufficient time to conduct a thorough review on your manuscript. Cookies policy. Similar results are achieved if simpler logistic regression models are considered, such as review type modelled on journal tier and institution and review type modelled on journal tier only. By using this website, you agree to our Check Status". Back to top. Accepted articles are automatically sent to the production department once the Editor has made a final decision of 'Accept'. Trends Ecol Evol. Post Decision Manuscripts Decision summarynature. Submission to first editorial decision: the median time (in days) from when a submission is received to when a first editorial decision about whether the paper was sent out for formal review or not is sent to the authors. 2006;6:12747. Decide and Notify authors of decisions made on articles. 2016;1(2):1637. 0000004498 00000 n If you have previously submitted a paper to a Nature Portfolio journal and would like an update on the status of your submission, please login to the manuscript tracking account for the . Your new or revised submission has been sent back by the Editorial Team for changes prior to review. reparationstapet kllare . 8. Your script could be better than the image of the journal. Nature and Nature Communications are to follow in due course. HUM6WEX:hQR{pe"3>g7`,. authors opting for DBPR should not post on preprint archives). Chung KC, Shauver MJ, Malay S, Zhong L, Weinstein A, Rohrich RJ. Journal Issue available online . Table2 displays the uptake by journal group and shows that the review model distribution changes as a function of the journal tier, with the proportion of double-blind papers decreasing for tiers with comparatively higher perceived prestige. We found that 10 countries contributed to 80% of all submissions, and thus, we grouped all other countries under the category Others. Cite this article. (major revision)6 (revision)3 (Covid-19) 3. This page provides information on peer review performance and citation metrics for Nature Communications. 0000001335 00000 n What happens after my manuscript is accepted? The Editor may be reading and assessing the submission, assigning additional editors according to the journal's polices, or taking some other action outside of the system. 0000039536 00000 n The gender (male, female, or NA) of the corresponding authors was determined from their first name using a third-party service (Gender API). Authors might choose SBPR when submitting their best work as they are proud of it and may opt for DBPR for work of lower quality, or, the opposite could be true, that is, authors might prefer to submit their best work as DBPR to give it a fairer chance against implicit bias. . Both authors read and approved the final manuscript. When a manuscript is re-ferred, all reviews and recommendations are sent with the manuscript to the receiving journal. Did you find it helpful? An Editor has been assigned, and has not yet taken an action that triggers some other status. Answer: From the description of the status change of the submission, it seems the manuscript did not pass the formatting check by the editorial staff and required corrections from the author. There, it will become a permanent part of the scholarly recordthat means that your manuscript will permanently remain publicly available, regardless of whether the journal you submitted it to accepts it or not. . Figure1 shows a Cohen-Friendly association plot indicating deviations from independence of rows (countries) and columns (peer review model) in Table5. The available data cannot tell us if other factors, such as the quality of the work, play a role in the choice of the review model. In order to assign a measure of institutional prestige to each manuscript, we used the 2016/2017 Times Higher Education rankings (THE [20]) and normalised the institution names using the GRID API. All authors are encouraged to update their demographic and expertise information during the confirmation step. manuscripts originally submitted to a journal and subsequently transferred to another journal which was deemed a better fit by the editor. 0000004388 00000 n In order to see whether the final decision outcome could be accurately predicted based on author and journal characteristics, we attempted to fit logistic regression models to the data. To post social content, you must have a display name. Finally, editors need to assess these reviews and formulate a decision. At the point of first submission, authors have to indicate whether they wish to have their manuscript considered under SBPR or DBPR, and this choice is maintained if the manuscript is declined by one journal and transferred to another. I submitted to Nature Neuroscience about 9 days ago and it's been "under consideration" for about a week. The corresponding author does not need to be the first author . In your 'Author Main Menu' manuscripts appear in different folders as they pass through phases in the editorial process: The submission is waiting for you to complete the submission (or revision) process. Help us improve this article with your feedback. Most journals assign a manuscript number upon initial submission and send an automated notice to advise you of the number (if not now, the manuscript number will be assigned when the first editor is assigned). Authors will get real time updates on their manuscripts progress through peer review in the private author dashboard. 0000003952 00000 n While these shortcomings of the data are beyond our control, we have made it clear in the Results section when and why we have excluded a subset of the dataset in each aspect of the analysis. The data that support the findings of this study are available from Springer Nature but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. This first-of-its-kindoption, called In Review, brought to you by our partners at Research Square, makes it easy to share a preprint of your manuscript on the Research Square platform andgives you real time updates onyour manuscripts progress through peer review. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.4.715. Once a paper is submitted, the journal editors proceed with their assessment of the work and decide whether each manuscript is sent out for review (OTR) to external reviewers. . A useful set of articles providing general advice about writing and submitting scientific papers can Manuscript # . We focus on the Nature journals as that portfolio covers a wide range of disciplines in the natural sciences and biomedical research, and thus, it gives us an opportunity to identify trends beyond discipline-specific patterns. 0000002247 00000 n sean penn parkinson's disease 2021. korttidsminne test siffror; lng eller kort pipa hagel. In the following analysis, we will refer to the data for groups 1, 2, and 3 as the Institution Dataset. The target number of required reviews has been completed, and the Handling Editor is considering the reviews. . Terms and Conditions, Am J Roentgenol. 'Submission Transfers Waiting for Author's Approval'. The proportion of authors choosing double-blind changes as a function of the institution group, with higher ranking groups having a higher proportion of single-blind manuscripts (Table4). An analysis of the journal Behavioral Ecology, which switched to DBPR in 2001, found a significant interaction between gender and time, reflecting the higher number of female authors after 2001, but no significant interaction between gender and review type [11]. Paginate and make available the correction notice in the online issue of the journal. We have used this definition because it is in line with that used in the guide to authors for Nature (https://www.nature.com/nature/for-authors/initial-submission). In WeWork, the Delaware Court of Chancery found that the use of Sprint email accounts by Sprint employees doing WeWork-related work for SoftBank caused the communications between SoftBank and those individuals to lose the privilege that might otherwise have attached to them.