Table11 displays the accept rate by review type defined as the number of accepted papers over the total number of accepted or rejected papers. Toggle navigation. BMC Med. botln botkyrka kommun. Each journal is able to customize the wording of the status terms, but the same status phases apply to all journals using Editorial Manager. On this page you will find a suite of citation-based metrics for Nature Communications which provides an overview of this journal. The status of the manuscript says 'Reviewers Assigned' for about 24 days. 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. 2009;4(1):624. The Editor has made a decision and requested you revise the submission. EDR was the major contributor in writing the Discussion and Conclusions sections. Finally, editors need to assess these reviews and formulate a decision. I have a revised manuscript which I submitted to Nature Communications. The analysis of success outcome at both the out-to-review and acceptance stages could in principle reveal the existence of any reviewer bias against authors characteristics. Submission has been transferred to another journal, see How does the Article Transfer Service work for authors? 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. Get Scientific Editing. We investigated the question of whether, out of the papers that go to review, manuscripts by female corresponding authors are more likely to be accepted than those with male corresponding authors under DBPR and SBPR. statement and Am Econ Rev. botln botkyrka kommun. Another issue that hampered our study was the lack of complete records for each manuscript in the dataset in relation to gender, country, and institution of the corresponding author. Your script could be better than the image of the journal. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The Immediacy Index is the average number of times an article is cited in the year it is published. Linkping University. Our systems have detected unusual traffic from your computer network. We found that DBPR papers that are sent to review have an acceptance rate that is significantly lower than that of SBPR papers. Papers. Tregenza T. Gender bias in the refereeing process? 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. Similar results were reported for the journal Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery [5]. 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). A PDF has been built, either by you or by the editor, that requires your approval to move forward. We did not find a significant association between gender and review type (Pearsons chi-square test results: 2=0.24883, df=1, p value=0.6179). JAMA. As such, the decision to publish an article rests entirely with the handling Editor. Decide and Notify authors of decisions made on articles. After manually checking a sample of gender assignments and their scores, we kept the gender returned by Gender API where the accuracy was at least 80 and assigned a value NA otherwise. Either behaviour may apply to different demographics of authors. Are there differences related to gender or institution within the same review model? How Many Seats Are Premium Economy On Emirates A380? Similar to the uptake case, the models do not have a good fit to the data. 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 . Therefore, in the DBPR case, we can conclude that there is a significant difference between the OTR rate of papers by male corresponding authors and the OTR rate of papers by female corresponding authors. The Editors have begun a decision in the system. Time: 2023-03-04T15:53:14+00:00. We investigated the proportion of OTR papers (OTR rate) under both peer review models to see if there were any differences related to gender or institution. (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The Article Influence Score determines the average influence of a journal's articles over the first five years after publication. We then mapped the normalised institution names from our dataset to the normalised institution names of the THE rankings via a Python script. 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 . The page is updated on an annual basis. P30 Lite Android 11 Release Date, 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). The submission remains at this status until you select "Build PDF for Approval". Editors need to identify, invite and get (often two or more) reviewers to agree to review. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0049-z, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s41073-018-0049-z. Posted on 31st May 2022 by 31st May 2022 by Make the correction notice free to view. PLOS ONE. Because we were unable to independently measure the quality of the manuscripts, this quality-dependent selection, if present, remains undetermined in our study. This can potentially skew our results if, for example, there are differences in the proportion of names that cannot be attributed between genders. Perspect Psychol Sci. 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. 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. Are there differences related to gender or institution within the same review model? 'Completed - Accept'. The difference, however, is very small. Finally, we associated each author with a gender label (male/female) by using the Gender API service [21]. 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. Double anonymity and the peer review process. This may be due to the higher quality of the papers from more prestigious institutions or to an editor bias towards institutional prestige, or both. We decided to exclude the NA entries for gender and tested the null hypothesis that the two populations (manuscripts by male corresponding authors and manuscripts by female corresponding authors) have the same OTR rate within each of the two review models. Katz DS, Proto AV, Olmsted WW. More specifically, the proportion of authors choosing DBPR is lower for higher ranking institution groups; in the uptake analysis by country, China and the USA stand out for their strong preference for DBPR and SBPR, respectively. 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. It is calculated by dividing the number of citations in the JCR year by the total number of articles published in the five previous years. 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. 201451 XXXXX@nature.com Final decision for XXXXX. How does the Article Transfer Service work for authors? manuscripts originally submitted to a journal and subsequently transferred to another journal which was deemed a better fit by the editor. All authors are encouraged to update their demographic and expertise information during the confirmation step. Nature Communications was another publishing master stroke for Nature that also took advantage of a new market opportunity. More information regarding the release of these data 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. Tomkins A, Zhang M, Heavlin WD. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of Springer Nature. authors opting for DBPR should not post on preprint archives). The corresponding author takes responsibility for the manuscript during the submission, peer review and production process. Press J to jump to the feed. Hi, it depends from the Journal but normally you can wait more days. However, when they communicated their decision to the Editor-in-Chief (EiC), who makes the final decision, it was decided to reconsider your manuscript. Based on these results, we cannot conclude whether the referees are biased towards gender. In order to identify the pair(s) giving rise to this difference, we performed a test of equal proportion for each pair and accounted for multiple testing with Bonferroni correction. In this scheme, authors are given the option to publish the peer review history of the paper alongside their published research. We then studied the manuscripts editorial outcome in relation to review model and authors characteristics. The decision may need to be confirmed by multiple Editors in some journals, and the Editors may decide to seek additional reviews or assign another Editor, returning the manuscript to an earlier status. . This status will remain until an Editor takes an action in the system to change the status, usually inviting reviewers. 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. Third review was never returned so decision was at least partly based on two reviews from the same discipline. 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. Because the median is not subject to the . A 3D accelerometer device and host-board (i.e., sensor node) were embedded in a case . . Ross-Hellauer T, Deppe A, Schmidt B. Accepted articles are automatically sent to the production department once the Editor has made a final decision of 'Accept'. You can useIn Reviewto access up-to-date information on where your article is in the peer review process. Click here to download our quick reference guide to journal metrics. Examines all aspects of your scientific document. Sci World J. ,.,., . We fitted logistic regression models and report details on their goodness of fit. How do I find and access my journal's submission system. For some journals, the status may include the decision term e.g. Reviewers have been invited and the peer review process is underway. 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. How do I check the status of my manuscript? 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). Watch the Checking the status of your submission video for more information. This reply will be sent to the author of the Correspondence before publication. In the post-review analysis, we found that DBPR papers that are sent to review have an acceptance rate that is significantly lower than that of SBPR papers. EDR proposed the study and provided the data on manuscript submissions and the gender data from Gender API. 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. Usually when a paper is received for publication, the Editor in chief considers the paper and then transmits it to the suitable . ->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. 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. The result was a p value below 0.05, which shows that removing any of the predictors would harm the fit of the best model. For other authors characteristics, such as institutional prestige, a quality factor is more likely than for gender: it is not unthinkable to assume that on average manuscripts from more prestigious institutions, which tend to have more resources, are of a higher quality than those from institutions with lower prestige and fewer means. For further information, please contact Research Square at info@researchsquare.com. A study analysing 940 papers submitted to an international conference on economics held in Sweden in 2008 found no significant difference between the grades of female- and male-authored papers by review type [12]. The status changed to "Manuscript under editorial consideration" last night without it changing to "Editor decision started" like in other examples. 9.3 weeks. Is double-blinded peer review necessary? 1 Answer to this question. The area of each rectangle is proportional to the difference between observed and expected frequencies, where the dotted lines refer to expected frequencies. bounded rationality . Chung KC, Shauver MJ, Malay S, Zhong L, Weinstein A, Rohrich RJ. We did not observe gender-related differences in uptake. Some editors keep a paper for long time, more than 6 months or a year, without a decision and when send them a reminder message they do not reply or sometimes reply for the first time saying that . . The post-review outcome of papers as a function of the institution group and review model (Table15) showed that manuscripts from less prestigious institutions are accepted at a lower rate than those from more prestigious ones, even under DBPR; however, due to the small numbers of papers at this stage, the results are not statistically significant. Papers. The original authors are given 10 days to respond. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Reviewer bias in single- versus double-blind peer review.