decision sent to author nature communications decision sent to author nature communications

The journal's Editorial team will check the submission and either send back to the author for action, or assign to an Editor. The Editor has made a decision and requested you revise the submission. EDR was the major contributor in writing the Discussion and Conclusions sections. 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. We found a small but significant association between journal tier and review type (p value <0.001, Cramers V=0.054, df=2). Posted on 31st May 2022 by 31st May 2022 by Make the correction notice free to view. So, in October 2018, we added a new option for you when you submit to select Springer Nature journals. In any 6-month period, manuscripts can be under editorial assessment . The height of the rectangles is related to the significance and the width to the amount of data that support the result. editors waits for him to send his comments then they contact the author and make a decision on the basis of these reports and send you acceptance, rejection or revision based on their reports . A decision to send the paper for review can take longer, but usually within a month (in which case the editors send apologies). We also attempted to fit a generalized linear mixed effects model with a random effect for the country category, as we can assume that the data is sampled by country and observations from the same country share characteristics and are not independent. Transfer of papers between Cell Press journals and Molecular Plant. After making the decision, it is necessary to notify the authors. More information regarding the approach taken to derive the median citation can be found here. Which proportions of papers are accepted for publication under SBPR and DBPR? Nature Communications Q&A - Cameronneylon.net decision sent to author nature communications - tCubed 0000001568 00000 n The prestige of the corresponding authors institutions was measured from the data of the Global Research Identifier Database (GRID) by dividing institutions in three prestige groups with reference to the 2016 Times Higher Education (THE) ranking. Background Double-blind peer review has been proposed as a possible solution to avoid implicit referee bias in academic publishing. Online First - Article available online 6. our vision is for all Springer Nature authors and reviewers to have an ORCID iD, and we are confident we will get there, slowly but surely. In our case, the option that the outcome is subject to a complex combination of soft constraints or incentives is possible, which supports our simpler approach of evaluating the variables with the bivariate approach we have reported on. 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%. All communication from submission to publication will be with the corresponding author. 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 Our commitment to early sharing and transparency in peer review inspires us to think about how to help our authors in new ways. Author uptake for double-blind submissions was 12% (12,631 out of 106,373). v)ic#L7p[ q^$;lmP)! 0000004437 00000 n 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. My father emptied the thing at an unknown date ruining my spontaneous project, but at least I was able to recover the skull, jaw, spine & ribs. Nature Neuroscience manuscript stage : r/labrats - Reddit 'Completed - Accept'. This status will remain until an Editor takes an action in the system to change the status, usually inviting reviewers. Usage: and JavaScript. 2008;23(7):3513. 0000005880 00000 n If authors choose DBPR, their details (names and affiliations) are removed from the manuscript files, and it is the authors responsibility to ensure their own anonymity throughout the text and beyond (e.g. Among the studies dealing with institutional bias, an analysis of abstracts submitted to the American Heart Associations annual Scientific Sessions research meeting from 2000 to 2004 found some evidence of bias favouring authors from English-speaking countries and prestigious institutions [14]. Press J to jump to the feed. We only retained a normalised institution name and country when the query to the GRID API returned a result with a high confidence, and the flag manual review was set to false, meaning that no manual review was needed. 0000065294 00000 n When the Editors begin to enter a decision it will move the status to 'Decision in Process'. A test for equality of proportions for groups 1 and 2 for SBPR papers returned a significant difference (2=331.62, df=1, p value <0.001); the same test for group 2 and group 3 for SBPR papers also returned a significant difference (2=464.86, df=1, p value <0.001). The Alan Turing Institute, London, England, Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Faculty of Modern and Medieval Languages, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK, Springer Nature, 4 Crinan Street, London, UK, You can also search for this author in we could have chosen a different distribution of institutions among the four categories, and will likely have an impact on the uptake of DBPR across the institutional prestige spectrum. Corrected proofs returned by author 5. Often commercial sensors do not provide researchers with sufficient raw and open data; therefore, the aim of this study was to develop an open and customizable system to classify cattle behaviors. 0000002247 00000 n 2017;12(12):e0189311. %PDF-1.3 % It is calculated by multiplying the Eigenfactor Score by 0.01 and dividing by the number of articles in the journal, normalized as a fraction of all articles in all publications. Nature 's editors are. Modified on: Thu, 30 Jul, 2020 at 4:54 PM. This reply will be sent to the author of the Correspondence before publication. 0000001335 00000 n Thus, we cannot draw conclusions on any editor bias. 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. Submission to first editorial decision - 8, Submission to first post-review decision - 46. Article Tracking will guide you through the stages from the moment your article has been submitted until it is published. So, in October 2018, we added a new option for you when you submit to select Springer Nature journals. Editorial Manager displays status terms as described in the table below. PLOS ONE. Perspect Psychol Sci. 3. level 1. EDR is employed by Macmillan Publishers Ltd, which publishes the Nature-branded journals. journals - All Reviewers Assigned : Nature Communications revised We divided the journals in three tiers: (i) the flagship interdisciplinary journal (Nature), (ii) the discipline-specific sister journals (Nature Astronomy, Nature Biomedical Engineering, Nature Biotechnology, Nature Cell Biology, Nature Chemical Biology, Nature Chemistry, Nature Climate Change, Nature Ecology & Evolution, Nature Energy, Nature Genetics, Nature Geoscience, Nature Human Behaviour, Nature Immunology, Nature Materials, Nature Medicine, Nature Methods, Nature Microbiology, Nature Nanotechnology, Nature Neuroscience, Nature Photonics, Nature Physics, Nature Plants, Nature Structural & Molecular Biology), and (iii) the open-access interdisciplinary title (Nature Communications). This is because online submission has completely abolished the uncertainty of postal speed, an obstacle faced when manually submitting a manuscript. The overall uptake of DBPR is 12%, corresponding to 12,631 manuscripts, while for 93,742 manuscripts, the authors chose the single-blind option. Peer Review | Nature Portfolio . Reviews for "Nature Communications" - Page 1 - SciRev 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. This is known as a rescinding. 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. Scand J Econ. 15 days You can make one of the following decisions: Accept, Revise or Reject. PubMedGoogle Scholar. 2021 Journal Metrics. A 3D accelerometer device and host-board (i.e., sensor node) were embedded in a case . 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. There is a tiny but significant association between institution group and acceptance, which means that authors from less prestigious institutions tend to be rejected more than authors from more prestigious institutions, regardless of review type. 0000004476 00000 n 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). How does the Article Transfer Service work for authors? Please log in to your personal My Springer Nature profile and click on "Your submissions" to start tracking your articles. Accelerated Communications, JBC Reviews, Meeting Reports, Letters to the Editor, and Corrections, as well as article types that publish . Double anonymity and the peer review process. Cite this article. The area under the receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve is 0.65. As there are many steps involved in the editorial process, this may in some cases take longer than you had anticipated. Terms and Conditions, The final dataset was further processed and then analysed statistically using the statistical programming language R, version 3.4.0. Double-blind peer review (DBPR) has been proposed as a means to avoid implicit bias from peer reviewers against characteristics of authors such as gender, country of origin, or institution. Ross JS, Gross CP, Desai MM, Hong Y, Grant AO, Daniels SR, Krumholz HM. What does the status of my submission mean in Editorial Manager? - Elsevier Ross-Hellauer T, Deppe A, Schmidt B. "Editor decision started" means that the editor is actively reading the manuscript. Across the three institution groups, SBPR papers are more likely to be sent to review. Title page: A separate title page is necessary and should bear a) the title of the article, b) name of the authors, c) the institutions of origin, d) a short title and for Short Communications also the corresponding author's name, address, and e-mail.Please note that it should be a maximum of 5 authors for Short Communications. botln botkyrka kommun. Papers. 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. However, we find that a logarithmic-based categorization of this sort would be more representative than a linear-based one. 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]. Yes We then analysed the uptake by gender for the entire portfolio, as we were interested in finding any gender-related patterns. If you need any assistance please contact us at Author Support, or contact the responsible editor for the journal. (Nature Portfolio Data), Nature Communications (Nat Commun) "This is an extension of the wisdom-of-crowds theory that allows us to relax the assumption that being in big groups is always the best way to make a . And here is a list of journals currently onIn Review. MOYcs@9Y/b6olCfEa22>*OnAhFfu J 1m,&A mc2ya5a'3jyoJx6Fr?pW6'%c?,J;Gu"BB`Uc!``!,>. wuI-\Z&fy R-7. 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. Issue a separate correction notice electronically linked back to the corrected version. Research Square notifies authors of preprint posting, and sends a link to the author dashboard. For this, we used a test for equality of proportions with continuity correction. 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. So, in October 2018, we added a new . Connect with us on LinkedIn and stay up to date with news and development. The underlying research question that drove this study is to assess whether DBPR is effective in removing or reducing implicit reviewer bias in peer review. Rejection of your paper / manuscript : Nature Support 7u?p#T3;JUQJBw|u 2v{}ru76SRA? Trends Ecol Evol. 9 days How many days did the entire process take? On this page you will find a suite of citation-based metrics for Nature Communications which provides an overview of this journal. Finally, editors need to assess these reviews and formulate a decision. Examines all aspects of your scientific document. Includes a detailed report with feedback and, for journal manuscripts, publishing advice and journal recommendations based on our editors' detailed assessment of your findings. Table13 shows the proportion of manuscripts that are sent for review and accepted or rejected with different peer review model and by gender of the corresponding author. Nature Communications: n/a: n/a: 6.0 days: n/a: n/a: n/a: Rejected (im.) 2009;4(1):624. n - We observed that DBPR is chosen more often by authors submitting to higher impact journals within the Nature portfolio, by authors from specific countries (India and China in particular, among countries with the highest submission rates), and by authors from less prestigious institutions. We tested the null hypothesis that the populations (institution groups 1, 2, and 3) have the same proportion of accepted manuscripts for SBPR manuscripts with a test for equality of proportions (proportion of accepted manuscripts 0.49 for group 1, 0.44 for group 2, and 0.41 for group 3). Paginate and make available the correction notice in the online issue of the journal. This is public, and permanent. r/biology I buried a dead rat (killed by delayed rat poison or a neighbor's cat) in an iron barrel with soil on Sep 8. Decisions are to be made by consensus. 2006;295(14):167580. We only considered 83,256 (out of the 106,373) manuscripts for which the gender assigned to the corresponding authors name by Gender API had a confidence score of at least 80 and the gender was either male or female (the Gender Dataset, excluding transfers). 0000002034 00000 n Find submission status of your article / manuscript - Nature Support 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. So, in October 2018, we added a new . Finally, editors need to assess these reviews and formulate a decision. In the past if your work wasn't accepted in Nature or Science researchers would often try the respected general journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, USA, or PNAS - which wags dubbed "Probably Not . Did you find it helpful? Please let me know of your decision at your earliest . 2016;1(2):1637. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings. A useful set of articles providing general advice about writing and submitting scientific papers can Manuscript # . In order to detect any bias towards institutional prestige, we referred to a dataset containing 20,706 records, which includes OTR papers that were either rejected or accepted, as well as transfers. Please note that this definition is different from that of the corresponding author(s) as stated on published articles and who are the author(s) responsible for correspondence with readers. . Which proportions of papers are sent out to review under SBPR and DBPR? We found a significant result (2=37.76, df=2, p value <0.001). Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Masked reviews are not fairer reviews. The decision involved a ruling on a motion to . We identify two potential causes for this, one being a difference in quality and the other being a gender bias. 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. Bruce R, Chauvin A, Trinquart L, Ravaud P, Boutron I. Table1 displays the number and proportion of transfers by journal group. The journal Immediacy Index indicates how quickly articles in a journal are cited. We then studied the manuscripts editorial outcome in relation to review model and authors characteristics. 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. Privacy