decision sent to author nature communications

After review, Nature Communications rejected it because of reason X. Katz DS, Proto AV, Olmsted WW. In the following analysis, we will refer to the data where the gender field is not NA as the Gender Dataset. 0000011085 00000 n von | Mai 21, 2022 | safello aktie flashback | Mai 21, 2022 | safello aktie flashback The report will be advisory to the editors. McGillivray, B., De Ranieri, E. Uptake and outcome of manuscripts in Nature journals by review model and author characteristics. For most of our journals the corresponding author can track the article online. Decision Sent to Author 2020-07-09 08:38:16 Decision Pending 2020-06-29 08:28:42 Under Review 2020-06-25 09:38:03 Under Editorial Consideration 2020-06-23 10:09:56 Manuscript Submission 2020-04-09 14:44:05 Stage Start Date Manuscript Ready for Publication 2020-07-16 10:45:24 . We however included transfers in all other analyses because we considered the analysed items as combinations of three attributes: paper, corresponding author, and journal to which the paper was submitted. Median values and the graphed interval (minimum and maximum values), are indicated. JAMA. The target number of required reviews has been completed, and the Handling Editor is considering the reviews. 2017-07-13 11:21. In spite of the presence of explicit instructions to authors, this type of review model has sometimes been shown to fail to hide authors identity. 0000006171 00000 n There is a small but significant association between institution group and acceptance (Pearsons chi-square test results: 2=49.651, df=3, p value <0.001, Cramers V=0.049). To place the results below within the right context, we point out that this study suffered from a key limitation, namely that we did not have an independent measure of quality for the manuscript or a controlled experiment in which the same manuscript is reviewed under both peer review models. Because the median is not subject to the distortions from outliers, we have developed and provided the 2-year Median, derived from Web of Science data and defined as the median number of citations received in 2021for articles published in 2019and 2020. Did you find it helpful? 0000002625 00000 n In the context of scientific literature, an analysis of 2680 manuscripts from seven journals found no overall difference in the acceptance rates of papers according to gender, while at the same time reporting a strong effect of number of authors and country of affiliation on manuscripts acceptance rates [9]. The decision involved a ruling on a motion to . 25th Apr, 2017. Uptake and outcome of manuscripts in Nature journals by review model and author characteristics, https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0049-z, https://www.nature.com/nature/for-authors/initial-submission, https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000001820, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01102.x, https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/. by | May 28, 2022 | vga white light on asus motherboard | anskan om utbyte av utlndskt krkort | May 28, 2022 | vga white light on asus motherboard | anskan om utbyte av utlndskt krkort Correct the online article. We employed hypothesis testing techniques to test various hypotheses against the data. waiting to send decision to author nature. Please watch the Submission status explainer video below for more information. Next, we focussed on a potential institutional bias and looked at the relationship between OTR rate and institutional prestige as measured by the groups defined based on THE ranking explained above (excluding the fourth group, for which no THE ranking was available), regardless of review type (Table9). By rejecting non-essential cookies, Reddit may still use certain cookies to ensure the proper functionality of our platform. (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The 5-year journal Impact Factor, available from 2007 onward, is the average number of times articles from the journal published in the past five years have been cited in the JCR year. Journals can customize the wording of status terms. Posted by May 21, 2022 upphittade katter vstervik on jag har avslutat min anstllning autosvar engelska May 21, 2022 upphittade katter vstervik on jag har avslutat min anstllning autosvar engelska Abstract: The abstract not exceeding 150 words and preferably in . How Many Seats Are Premium Economy On Emirates A380?, . In this scheme, authors are given the option to publish the peer review history of the paper alongside their published research. Are you sure you do not want to provide feedback? In Review. The Publications Ethics Committee is composed of a chair and two members appointed by the RSNA Board. 0000005880 00000 n The full model has a pseudo R2 of 0.06, which means that the model only represents a 6% improvement over simply guessing the most frequent outcome, or in other words, the model is not powerful enough to predict the uptake of DB with high reliability. 2.3 Procedures Communications Arising submissions that meet Nature's initial selection criteria are sent to the authors of the original paper for a response, and the exchange to independent referees. J Lang Evol. Just select the In Review option when you submit your next article to one of the participating journals. Communications (max. 20000 characters with spaces), Research Articles (25000-40000 characters with spaces), . 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. However, we did not find a combination of predictors that led to a model with a good fit to the data. Our systems have detected unusual traffic from your computer network. Nature and Nature Communications are to follow in due course. China and the USA stand out for their strong preference for DBPR and SBPR, respectively. Webb TJ, OHara B, Freckleton RP. 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. Each review is due in ten days, and many of them do arrive in two weeks. More information regarding the approach taken to derive the median citation can be found here. Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. 2000;90(4):71541. Help us to improve this site, send feedback. Data from Web of Science was used; more information regarding the details of article categories and approach taken to derive the median citation can be found here. Let us suggest an alternative journal within our esteemed publishing portfolio for resubmitting your manuscript (and any reviewer comments) for fast, effortless publication. Editors need to identify, invite and get (often two or more) reviewers to agree to review. These records are excluded from the analysis, resulting in a dataset of 128,454 records, of which 20,406 (16%) were submitted to Nature, 65,234 (51%) to the 23 sister journals, and 42,814 (33%) to Nature Communications. Controlled experiments as described above were not possible due to peer review policies at the Nature journals and the fact that we could only analyse historical data. Papers from more prestigious institutions are more likely to be sent to review than papers from less prestigious institutions, regardless of review type. 0000008637 00000 n Mayo Clin Proc. Press J to jump to the feed. GRID - Global Research Identifier Database. 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. Decisions are to be made by consensus. Accessed 15 Jan 2017. The results were significant for all pairs: group 1 vs. group 2 (2=15.961, df=1, p value <0.001); group 2 vs. group 3 (2=7.1264, df=1, p value=0.0227); and group 1 vs. group 3 (2=37.304, df=1, p value <0.001). 0000014682 00000 n The area under the receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve is 0.40. Here, we define the corresponding author as the author who is responsible for managing the submission process on the manuscript tracking system and for all correspondence with the editorial office prior to publication. This is a statistically significant result, with a small effect size; the results of Pearsons chi-square test of independence are as follows: 2=1533.9, df=2, p value <0.001, Cramers V=0.147. 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. https://www.grid.ac. Uses field-specific PhD-qualified editors, editing to quality standards set by Nature Research. Share your preprint and track your manuscript's review progress with our In Review service. At Nature Biomedical Engineering, we collect some numbers into a 'journal dashboard': These numbers are running statistics over 6-month intervals (to smooth out fluctuations in the numbers*). As a consequence, we are unable to distinguish bias towards author characteristics or the review model from any quality effect, and thus, we cannot draw definitive conclusions on the efficacy of DBPR in addressing bias. 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. 0000055535 00000 n Across the three institution groups, SBPR papers are more likely to be sent to review. Privacy We found that manuscripts submitted under DBPR are less likely to be sent to review and accepted than those submitted under SBPR. The status of the manuscript says 'Reviewers Assigned' for about 24 days. 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. This is known as a rescinding. You should have received an email detailing the changes needed to your submission. First, we calculated the acceptance rate by gender, regardless of review type (Table12). These reviewers then need sufficient time to conduct a thorough review on your manuscript. May 2022 lewmar 185tt bow thruster parts Motivation: First decision to send out to review in 3 weeks, but then a very long delay to receiving a final decision. Type of Peer Review BBRC is a rapid communications journal. On this page you will find a suite of citation-based metrics for Nature Communications which provides an overview of this journal. Create an account to follow your favorite communities and start taking part in conversations. We employed descriptive statistics for data exploration, and we tested our hypotheses using Pearsons chi-square and binomial tests. You have completed the submission and approval steps, and the article has been submitted to the journal. Double anonymity and the peer review process. As needed, the journal editors may also ask the committee to provide opinions on the policies and procedures of the journals. The dataset contains both direct submissions and transfers, i.e. 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). 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. Nevertheless, the available data allowed us to draw conclusions on the uptake of the review models, as we detail below. The proportion of authors that choose double-blind review is higher when they submit to more prestigious journals, they are affiliated with less prestigious institutions, or they are from specific countries; the double-blind option is also linked to less successful editorial outcomes. We also found that manuscripts from female authors or authors from less prestigious institutions are accepted with a lower rate than those from male authors or more prestigious institutions, respectively. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1707323114. This measure is roughly analogous to the 5-Year Journal Impact Factor in that it is a ratio of a journal's citation influence to the size of the journal's article contribution over a period of five years. authors opting for DBPR should not post on preprint archives). Although each journal published by Cell Press is editorially independent, we have been using Editorial Manager, a manuscript tracking system that allows authors to transfer manuscripts along with any review comments they may have between Molecular Plant and Plant Communications.Should you have any questions about the . Sodexo Disney Springs, In order to test whether the proportions in different groups were the same, we used the test of equal proportions in R (command prop.test). Nature Portfolio is a signatory of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (see here for more information about our endorsement). Table6 shows the counts and proportions of manuscripts that were sent out for review or rejected by the editors as a function of peer review model. 0000062401 00000 n (The FAQ has more details about the mechanics of how this works.). Methods Data includes 128,454 manuscripts . EDR proposed the study and provided the data on manuscript submissions and the gender data from Gender API. The Editor has made a decision and requested you revise the submission. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript. This process left 13,542 manuscripts without a normalised name; for the rest of the manuscripts, normalised institution names and countries were found, which resulted in 5029 unique institution names. For this, we used a test for equality of proportions with continuity correction. In Review clearly links your manuscript to the journal reviewing it, while its in review. Peer review times vary per journal. Nature Communications is an open access, multidisciplinary journal dedicated to publishing high-quality research in all areas of the biological, physical, chemical and Earth sciences. Please log in to your personal My Springer Nature profile and click on "Your submissions" to start tracking your articles. The journal Immediacy Index indicates how quickly articles in a journal are cited. Authors will need to create an account (i.e., password) before logging in to see the dashboard. We had 58,920 records with normalised institutions and a THE rank, and we found that corresponding authors from the less prestigious institutions are more likely to choose double-blind review (p value <0.001, df=2, Cramers V=0.106). 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. Ross JS, Gross CP, Desai MM, Hong Y, Grant AO, Daniels SR, Krumholz HM. Concerning the institutions, we defined four categories according to their THE ranks and used these as a proxy for prestige: category 1 includes institutions with THE rank between 1 and 10 (corresponding to 7167 manuscripts, 6% of all manuscripts), category 2 is for THE ranks between 11 and 100 (25,345 manuscripts, 20% of all manuscripts), category 3 for THE ranks above 100 (38,772 manuscripts, 30% of all manuscripts), and category 4 for non-ranked institutions (57,170 manuscripts, or 45% of all manuscripts). 0000008659 00000 n . We employed a Wald test to evaluate the statistical significance of each coefficient in the model by testing the hypothesis that the coefficient of an independent variable in the model is significantly different from zero. If an author wishes to appeal against Nature 's decision, the appeal must be made in writing, not by telephone, and should be confined to the scientific case for publication. We investigated any potential differences in uptake depending on the journal tier. 0000047805 00000 n Because the median is not subject to the . In order to see whether author uptake could be accurately predicted based on author and journal characteristics, we attempted to fit logistic regression models to the data. BMcG was the major contributor in writing the Background and Methods sections. Hb```f``5g`c`} 6Pc. Thank you for visiting nature.com. Nature Communications: n/a: n/a: 6.0 days: n/a: n/a: n/a: Rejected (im.)

The Richest Church In Ghana, Denville Nj Property Taxes, Uncle Dale Covid, Ardoin Funeral Home Ville Platte, La, Asymmetrical Long Bob Haircut, Articles D