decision sent to author nature communications

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). 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. 0000014828 00000 n Your new or revised submission has been sent back by the Editorial Team for changes prior to review. The process was on par with other journal experiences, but I do not appreciate the inconsistency between what the editor at Nature Medicine told me when transferring to Nature Comms, and the final evaluation at Nature Comms. how to pronounce dandelion witcher. When the decision is finalized, you will receive a direct email with the overall editorial decision, Editor and/or reviewer comments, and further instructions. This resulted in 17,379 (14%) instances of manuscripts whose corresponding author was female, 83,830 (65%) manuscripts with male corresponding author, and 27,245 (21%) manuscripts with gender NA. 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. 0000006193 00000 n Authors of accepted papers will receive proofs of their article about 15 business days after the decision is sent. Table11 displays the accept rate by review type defined as the number of accepted papers over the total number of accepted or rejected papers. 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). The "satiscing," process-oriented view is based primarily on Simon's (1979) work on. 2002;179(6):14157. How Many Seats Are Premium Economy On Emirates A380?, . 2016;1(2):1637. When you submit your article through the manuscript submission systemyou will get the chance to opt in toIn Review. 2009;4(1):624. So, in October 2018, we added a new . %PDF-1.3 % Research Integrity and Peer Review The area under the receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve is 0.40. China and the USA stand out for their strong preference for DBPR and SBPR, respectively. Roberts SG, Verhoef T. Double-blind reviewing at EvoLang 11 reveals gender bias. 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. . Modified on: Thu, 30 Jul, 2020 at 4:54 PM. Don't wait too long. More information regarding the approach taken to derive the median citation can be found here. 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. Updates appear on the public peer review timeline as the manuscript progresses through peer review* (*Not available on Nature-branded journals.). In general, authors from countries with a more recent history of academic excellence are more likely to choose DBPR. Research Square converts the manuscript to HTML, assigns a DOI, and posts on the platform with a CC-BY license. Effect of blinded peer review on abstract acceptance. Especially the status 'Under review' encompasses many steps; while it may appear your manuscript is not progressing through the editorial process, a lot of activities may be happening during this part of the review process. Locate submission instructions for a Springer journal, Submit a manuscript with your ORCID number, Submit a Nature Portfolio manuscript for Open Access publishing, Submit multimedia files to be published online with your article. A decision to send the paper for review can take longer, but usually within a month (in which case the editors send apologies). Proc Natl Acad Sci. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Double-blind peer review has been proposed as a possible solution to avoid implicit referee bias in academic publishing. A PDF has been built, either by you or by the editor, that requires your approval to move forward. Nature Communications is incorporating transparent peer review into the journal on a permanent basis, following a successful ten-month trial. How Many Seats Are Premium Economy On Emirates A380? Create an account to follow your favorite communities and start taking part in conversations. Get Scientific Editing. JAMA. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings. 430,805 Altmetric mentions (2021), The Journal Impact Factor is defined as all citations to the journal in the current JCR year to items published in the previous two years, divided by the total number of scholarly items (these comprise articles, reviews, and proceedings papers) published in the journal in the previous two years. In the processing step, we excluded 5011 (3.8%) records which had an empty value in the column recording the review type due to technical issues in the submissions system for Nature Communications. This reply will be sent to the author of the Correspondence before publication. This may occur as a consequence of positive referee bias towards institution groups or to quality factors. We believe that Impact Factor is just one of a number of metrics that can be used to evaluate a journal, and a small number of highly cited papers can have a disproportionate effect on the mean number of citations per paper. 2007;18(2):MR000016. If you still have questions about what In Review can do for you or how it works, read our FAQ. 7u?p#T3;JUQJBw|u 2v{}ru76SRA? 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. Back to top. 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. This means that there is a statistically significant difference between the three groups. BMcG was the major contributor in writing the Background and Methods sections. Authors must then complete the submission process at the receiving journal. 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 . The results of a likelihood ratio showed that the more complex model is better than the simpler ones, and its pseudo R2 is the highest (though very low). 2006;6:12747. After review, Nature Communications rejected it because of reason X. 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]. Modified on: Thu, 30 Jul, 2020 at 4:54 PM. 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. However, we did not achieve a good fit, as per the binned plot of residuals against expected values, and the C-index (used to assess the discriminatory ability of standard logistic models) is 0.68, so well below the threshold of 0.8 for good fit. You have completed the submission and approval steps, and the article has been submitted to the journal. Median values and the graphed interval (minimum and maximum values), are indicated. Either behaviour may apply to different demographics of authors. Article In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles The status of the manuscript says 'Reviewers Assigned' for about 24 days. The meaning of 'reject & resubmit' is to indicate that in principle the editor likes the topic for their journal, but the current paper is . Here, we included data on direct submissions and transfers (101,209 submissions). . Download MP3 / 387 KB. This can potentially skew our results if, for example, there are differences in the proportion of names that cannot be attributed between genders. The submission process has completed with either an Accept or Reject decision. Corrected proofs returned by author 5. You can see an example in the article above. 0000047727 00000 n A 3D accelerometer device and host-board (i.e., sensor node) were embedded in a case . Needs Approval or Revision Needs Approval. 0000011063 00000 n This is because online submission has completely abolished the uncertainty of postal speed, an obstacle faced when manually submitting a manuscript. Nature 's editors are. The decision involved a ruling on a motion to . The author is usually given a deadline of a few weeks to a couple of months depending on the nature of revisions and the field of study. The dataset contains both direct submissions and transfers, i.e. 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 After reviewing the reports, you can proceed to making decisions on papers. The decision post-review of whether to accept a paper or not is taken by the editor but is based on the feedback received from the referees, so we assume that the decision at this stage would reflect a potential referee bias. Nature CommunicationsTips: NCOnline: 140 250 tips (Naturetransfer) NCzip"Zip of files for Reviewer" 2-4 2. We found a small but significant association between journal tier and review type. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01102.x. 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. MOYcs@9Y/b6olCfEa22>*OnAhFfu J 1m,&A mc2ya5a'3jyoJx6Fr?pW6'%c?,J;Gu"BB`Uc!``!,>. wuI-\Z&fy R-7. Also, because of the retrospective nature of this study, we could not conduct controlled experiments. 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. All communication from submission to publication will be with the corresponding author. Please try your request again later. . The Editors have begun a decision in the system. In Review. Table14 shows acceptance rate by institution group, regardless of review type. In Review clearly links your manuscript to the journal reviewing it, while its in review. A list of links to the Manuscript Tracking System login pages for each journal is available on the Nature Portfolio Journals A-Z webpage. 0000007420 00000 n 0000004476 00000 n GRID - Global Research Identifier Database. 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. (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The median number of citations received in 2019 for articles published in2017 and 2018. 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. But the confusing part is, is that the reviewer are now done with reviewing (Review completed) but the new status became apperently ''Manuscript under consideration". Linkping University. (But be sure all your coauthors agree to opt-in, too.) The WeWork Decision. As such, the decision to publish an article rests entirely with the handling Editor. 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 . 0000039536 00000 n 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. 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. DBPR was introduced in the Nature journals in response to the author communitys wish for a bias-free peer review process. 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 Corresponding author defined. Barbara McGillivray. The page will refresh upon submission. What happens after my manuscript is accepted? The Publications Ethics Committee is composed of a chair and two members appointed by the RSNA Board. 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. 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. The corresponding author takes responsibility for the manuscript during the submission, peer review and production process. LZ. Nature Communications was another publishing master stroke for Nature that also took advantage of a new market opportunity. 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. How masked is the masked peer review of abstracts submitted to international medical conferences? Similar to the uptake case, the models do not have a good fit to the data. 2015;136(6):136977. A Pearsons chi-square test found a significant, but small association between institution group and review type (2=656.95, df=2, p value <0.001, Cramers V=0.106). Springer Nature. Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) is a pediatric malignancy of skeletal muscle lineage with an aggressive subtype caused by translocations involving . (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The Eigenfactor Score calculation is based on the number of times articles from the journal published in the past five years have been cited in the JCR year, but it also considers which journals have contributed these citations so that highly cited journals will influence the network more than lesser cited journals. This status will remain until an Editor takes an action in the system to change the status, usually inviting reviewers. We first analysed the demographics of corresponding authors that choose DBPR by journal group, gender, country, and institution group. This might indicate that authors are more likely to choose DBPR when the stakes are higher in an attempt to increase their success chances by removing any implicit bias from the referees. This work was supported by The Alan Turing Institute under the EPSRC grant EP/N510129/1.