ZNet Tech is dedicated to making our contracts successful for both our members and our awarded vendors.
This can potentially skew our results if, for example, there are differences in the proportion of names that cannot be attributed between genders. 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. What does a quick change from 'Under consideration' to 'Decision made 2002;179(6):14157. 2017;12(12):e0189311. 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. In a systematic review and meta-analysis of biomedical journals investigating the interventions aimed at improving the quality of peer review in these publications, the authors reported that DBPR did not affect the quality of the peer review report or rejection rate [4]. 2009;4(1):624. 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. A useful set of articles providing general advice about writing and submitting scientific papers can Manuscript # . In Review. 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). Part of In the out-to-review analysis, we observed a significant difference between the OTR rate of papers by male and female corresponding authors of DBPR papers. One possible explanation for the lack of fit is that more or other predictors would be needed in order to fully explain the response, for example, a measure of quality, as we have already indicated. 0000011085 00000 n Download MP3 / 387 KB. 2021 Journal Metrics. 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. Manuscript Submission Guidelines: Natural Product Communications: SAGE For most of our journals the corresponding author can track the article online. The outcome both at first decision and post review is significantly more negative (i.e. 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. Rejection of your paper / manuscript : Nature Support Find submission status of your article / manuscript - Nature Support Each review is due in ten days, and many of them do arrive in two weeks. Check Status". You will receive more information via email from the production team regarding the publication process. Since the models showed a bad fit to the data according to accepted diagnostics criteria, further interpretation of the models is not warranted. Time: 2023-03-04T15:53:14+00:00. Journal metrics are based on the published output, thus those that are calculated from the output in multiple years will use a partial dataset for recently launched journals. We understand that you have not received any journal email. 2017-07-13 11:21. How do I find and access my journal's submission system. In the ten countries with the highest number of submissions, we found a large significant association between country and review type (p value <0.001, df=10, Cramers V=0.189). Submission to first post-review decision: for manuscripts that are sent to external reviewers, the median time (in days) taken from when a submission is received to when an editorial decision post-review is sent to the authors. We found that a smaller proportion of DBPR papers are sent to review compared with SBPR papers and that there is a very small but significant association between review type and outcome of the first editorial decision (results of a chi-square test: 2=1623.3, df=1, p value <0.001; Cramers V=0.112). https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings. The corresponding author does not need to be the first author . 0000004388 00000 n Falagas ME, Zouglakis GM, Kavvadia PK. 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). Research Integrity and Peer Review Results on the uptake are shown in Table5. Next steps for publishing your article: What to expect after acceptance, Timescale to publish an article for a Springer journal, Page numbers in a Continuous Article Publishing (CAP) Journal. For this analysis, we included direct submissions as well as transferred manuscripts, because the editorial criteria vary by journal and a manuscript rejected by one journal and transferred to another may then be sent out to review. This status will remain until you begin the process of submitting your revision. 2006;6:12747. 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). 2006;81(5):705. Helmer M, Schottdorf M, Neef A, Battaglia D. Research: gender bias in scholarly peer review. Transfer of papers between Cell Press journals and Molecular Plant. How much time does the scientific journal 'Nature' take from - Quora and JavaScript. 0000004437 00000 n This may be due to editor bias towards the review model, to a quality effect (authors within each institution group choose to submit their best studies under SBPR), or both. Usage: All authors are encouraged to update their demographic and expertise information during the confirmation step. &@ 5A9BC|2 @So0 This decision is the sole responsibility of the . The final dataset was further processed and then analysed statistically using the statistical programming language R, version 3.4.0. Get Scientific Editing. Masked reviews are not fairer reviews. The corresponding author takes responsibility for the manuscript during the submission, peer review and production process. If we compare the proportion of accepted manuscripts under DBPR and authored by female vs. male corresponding authors (26 vs. 25%) with a test for equality of proportions with continuity correction, we find that there is a not a significant difference in female authors and male authors for DBPR-accepted papers (results of two-sample test for equality of proportions with continuity correction: 2=0.03188, df=1, p value=0.8583). We calculated that, at this rate, it would take us several decades to collect sufficient data that would result in statistically significant results, so another strategy is required, e.g. The decision is sent to the author. national association of state directors of developmental disabilities service, how many years did juan carlos serve as king. 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. journals - All Reviewers Assigned : Nature Communications revised We did not observe any difference by author gender. The full model has a pseudo R2 of 0.05, and the binned plot of the models residuals against the expected values also shows a poor fit. Submission has been transferred to another journal, see How does the Article Transfer Service work for authors? 0000082326 00000 n . Let us suggest an alternative journal within our esteemed publishing portfolio for resubmitting your manuscript (and any reviewer comments) for fast, effortless publication. Jefferson T, Rudin M, Brodney Folse S, Davidoff F. Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies. Incidence and nature of unblinding by authors: our experience at two radiology journals with double-blinded peer review policies. We decided to exclude the gender values NA and we observed a significant but very small difference in the acceptance rate by gender (Pearsons chi-square test of independence: 2=3.9364, df=1, p value=0.047; Cramers V=0.015), leading us to conclude that manuscripts by female corresponding authors are slightly less likely to be accepted. This study provides insight on authors behaviour when submitting to high-impact journals. Accessed 15 Jan 2017. Because we were unable to independently measure the quality of the manuscripts, this quality-dependent selection, if present, remains undetermined in our study. So, in October 2018, we added a new option for you when you submit to select Springer Nature journals. volume3, Articlenumber:5 (2018) https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.4.715. Authors will get real time updates on their manuscripts progress through peer review in the private author dashboard. That is, authors that feel more vulnerable to implicit bias against the prestige of their institutional affiliation or their country tend to choose DBPR to prevent such bias playing a role in the editorial decision. Depending upon the nature of the revisions, the revised paper may be sent out for additional review or it may be accepted directly. 0000008659 00000 n As mentioned above and discussed below in more detail, the fact that we did not control for the quality of the manuscripts means that the conclusions on the efficacy of DBPR that can be drawn from this data are limited. This work was supported by The Alan Turing Institute under the EPSRC grant EP/N510129/1. The results on author uptake show that DBPR is chosen more frequently by authors that submit to higher impact journals within the portfolio, by authors from certain countries, and by authors from less prestigious institutions. The original authors are given 10 days to respond. When you submit your article through the manuscript submission systemyou will get the chance to opt in toIn Review. Cohen-Friendly association plot for Table5. Information for other options are available on our Springer Nature Transfer Desk page. 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. Until this is done, the decision can be changed. As mentioned in the Methods section, we have used a commercial algorithm to attribute gender based on first names, and discarded records that could not be matched with accuracy greater than 80%.