decision sent to author nature communications
Median values and the graphed interval (minimum and maximum values), are indicated. We found that 10 countries contributed to 80% of all submissions, and thus, we grouped all other countries under the category Others. Table7 shows the results; for the sake of completeness, Table7 includes the number and percentages of rejected vs. out-to-review manuscripts for which the gender of the corresponding author was NA. Timely attention to proofs will ensure the article is slated for the next possible issue. 0000004476 00000 n We also conducted regression analyses on the data, to measure the effect of different variables such as gender and institution group on three outcomes: author uptake, out-to-review, and acceptance. All other data has been produced by Clarivate Analytics. %PDF-1.3 % 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]. Cite this article. Once a paper is submitted, the journal editors proceed with their assessment of the work and decide whether each manuscript is sent out for review (OTR) to external reviewers. This can potentially skew our results if, for example, there are differences in the proportion of names that cannot be attributed between genders. 201451 XXXXX@nature.com Final decision for XXXXX. 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". Finally, we associated each author with a gender label (male/female) by using the Gender API service [21]. In Review clearly links your manuscript to the journal reviewing it, while its in review. Are there differences related to gender or institution within the same review model? Cohen-Friendly association plot for Table5. Manuscript Submission Guidelines: Natural Product Communications: SAGE 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. Accelerated Communications, JBC Reviews, Meeting Reports, Letters to the Editor, and Corrections, as well as article types that publish . After making the decision, it is necessary to notify the authors. 0000008659 00000 n 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. 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. Helmer M, Schottdorf M, Neef A, Battaglia D. Research: gender bias in scholarly peer review. Incidence and nature of unblinding by authors: our experience at two radiology journals with double-blinded peer review policies. Hi, it depends from the Journal but normally you can wait more days. Arbitration, a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), is a way to resolve disputes outside the judiciary courts.The dispute will be decided by one or more persons (the 'arbitrators', 'arbiters' or 'arbitral tribunal'), which renders the 'arbitration award'. 0000014828 00000 n In WeWork, the Delaware Court of Chancery found that the use of Sprint email accounts by Sprint employees doing WeWork-related work for SoftBank caused the communications between SoftBank and those individuals to lose the privilege that might otherwise have attached to them. Connect with us on LinkedIn and stay up to date with news and development. and JavaScript. The study was designed to analyse the manuscripts submitted to Nature-branded journals publishing primary research between March 2015 (when the Nature-branded primary research journals introduced DBPR as an opt-in service) and February 2017. Share your preprint and track your manuscript's review progress with our In Review service. Click on the journal name to where you submitted your manuscript. hoi4 what to do when capitulate. As there are many steps involved in the editorial process, this may in some cases take longer than you had anticipated. You will receive more information via email from the production team regarding the publication process. This is because the Nature journals do not collect information on authors gender, and thus, such information can only be retrieved with name-matching algorithms with limited accuracy. 9 days How many days did the entire process take? Several Nature journals (see list below) follow a transparent peer review system, publishing details about the peer review process as part of the publication (including the reviewer comments to. Peer Review | Nature Portfolio 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. You have completed the submission and approval steps, and the article has been submitted to the journal. 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. Every step is described and will let you know whether action is required. In order to reduce the variability in the institutional affiliations, we normalised the institution names and countries via a Python script that queried the API of the Global Resource Identified Database (GRID [19]). When a manuscript is re-ferred, all reviews and recommendations are sent with the manuscript to the receiving journal. When can I expect a decision from the Editor? Finding reviewers who agree to deal with the paper - another week. The UC's agreement with Springer Nature is a three-year-plus agreement, through 2023, that increases both UC's access to Springer Nature journals and support for the open access publication of UC research. 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. The dataset consisted of 133,465 unique records, with 63,552 different corresponding authors and 209,057 different institution names. In addition, the high prestige of these journals might accentuate an implicit referee bias and therefore makes such journals a good starting point for such an analysis. 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. Data includes 128,454 manuscripts received between March 2015 and February 2017 by 25 Nature-branded journals. Just select the In Review option when you submit your next article to one of the participating journals. Please enter your feedback to submit this form, Journal Article Publishing Support Center. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative. Either behaviour may apply to different demographics of authors. Toggle navigation. Our aim was to understand the demographics of author uptake and infer the presence of any potential implicit bias towards gender, country, or institutional prestige in relation to the corresponding author. The Editors have begun a decision in the system. Article 2016;1(2):1637. The study reported on here is the first one that focusses on Nature-branded journals, with the overall aim to investigate whether there is any implicit bias in peer review in these journals and ultimately understand whether DBPR is an effective measure in removing referee bias and improving the peer review of scientific literature. 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. When the decision is finalized, you will receive a direct email with the overall editorial decision, Editor and/or reviewer comments, and further instructions. The available data cannot tell us if other factors, such as the quality of the work, play a role in the choice of the review model. When analysing data for the entire portfolio, we only included direct submissions (106,373) and we excluded manuscripts that were rejected by one journal and then transferred to another. In the SBPR case, we cannot reject the null hypothesis. making DBPR compulsory to accelerate data collection and remove potential bias against the review model. . We observed a trend in which the OTR rate for both DBPR and SBPR papers decreases as the prestige of the institution groups decreases, and we tested for the significance of this. In this scheme, authors are given the option to publish the peer review history of the paper alongside their published research. Search. 2023 BioMed Central Ltd unless otherwise stated. Proofs are sent before publication; authors are welcome to discuss proposed changes with Nature's subeditors, but Nature reserves the right to make the final decision about matters of style and the size of figures. 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. 2017;6:e21718. 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. Hb```f``5g`c`} 6Pc. Research Square converts the manuscript to HTML, assigns a DOI, and posts on the platform with a CC-BY license. For some journals, the status may include the decision term e.g. A decision to send the paper for review can take longer, but usually within a month (in which case the editors send apologies). Post Decision Manuscripts Decision summarynature. The corresponding author takes responsibility for the manuscript during the submission, peer review and production process. JAMA. 20000 characters with spaces), Research Articles (25000-40000 characters with spaces), . Finally, editors need to assess these reviews and formulate a decision. This might be the result of editor bias towards the review model, of the fact that female authors select their best papers to be DBPR to increase their chances of being accepted, or both. Results on the uptake are shown in Table5. If you need any assistance please contact us at Author Support, or contact the responsible editor for the journal. (major revision)6 (revision)3 (Covid-19) 3. 0000011085 00000 n No, Modified on: Mon, 5 Sep, 2022 at 6:52 PM. For most of our journals the corresponding author can track the article online. We found that DBPR papers that are sent to review have an acceptance rate that is significantly lower than that of SBPR papers. 8. "Editor decision started" means that the editor is actively reading the manuscript. The data that support the findings of this study are available from Springer Nature but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. This is known as a rescinding. Trends Ecol Evol. In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles 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. All communication from submission to publication will be with the corresponding author. palabras en latn con significados bonitos. Linkping University. 2006;81(5):705. 0000062617 00000 n Please log in to your personal My Springer Nature profile and click on "Your submissions" to start tracking your articles. All authors are encouraged to update their demographic and expertise information during the confirmation step. Time: 2023-03-04T15:53:14+00:00. 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. Nevertheless, the available data allowed us to draw conclusions on the uptake of the review models, as we detail below. DBPR was introduced in the Nature journals in response to the author communitys wish for a bias-free peer review process. 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. 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). 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. We had gender information for 50,533 corresponding authors and found no statistically significant difference in the distribution of peer review model between males and females (p value=0.6179). Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. Decisions are to be made by consensus. If you have no email from the journal and have already checked the spam folder of your mailbox, you may check if the submission . Table3 shows the distribution of DBPR and SBPR in the three gender categories. Once your articleis accepted for publication, you can track its status with the track your accepted article tool. Goldin C, Rouse C. Orchestrating impartiality: the impact of blind auditions on female musicians. This choice of categories is arbitrary, e.g. A 3D accelerometer device and host-board (i.e., sensor node) were embedded in a case . Effect of blinded peer review on abstract acceptance.