Awaiting reviewer selection after major revision example. For most manuscripts, in the .

Awaiting reviewer selection after major revision example There is In the case of a Revision decision, it would also include your view of essential enhancements the authors must make or any other particular issues related to the paper. Awaiting Reviewer Selection, which is the next stage, means that the editor has received responses from multiple peer reviewers and is presently in the process of making a selection among them. When a manuscript is listed as "In reviewer agreement" in a journal's status, it means that the reviewer or reviewers who have been assigned to the manuscript are So, we have made some edits/assumptions. The reviewer has raised a new issue in the 2nd revision and the reviewer has recommended me to revise the paper again. Major revisions It is very unusual for a paper to be accepted without needing any revisions. The author is usually given a deadline of a few weeks to a few months; this may be extended upon Is one month a long time to wait for the reviewer scores? It is a bit long, but the delay could be because not all the reviewer scores have come in. Bottom line, it's all depends how well you respond to reviewer comments and how much reviewer and editor get satisfy with your revised version. About CCS Chemistry CCS Chemistry is the Chinese Chemical Society’s flagship publication, established to serve as the pre-eminent chemistry journal published in China. However, the editor asked me to improve my abstract, introduction, and structure (as a second major Later, I submitted my online application and received a confirmation e-mail after 2 days stating that my paper has passed the initial screening and it is now awaiting reviewer selection. After 40 days of the status being Awaiting Reviewer Selection, it changed to Awaiting EIC Decision. Once enough reviewers have been selected, the manuscript will move on to the next stage. After making revisions according to the After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. If you wanna know in detail what is going on, the only option you have, is to e-mail the editor. How After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. You will now see a list of your assignments. I would write your best revision and include a very strongly (but politely and professionally) constructed and worded cover letter directly addressing the reviewer's points including the fact that I submitted an article to an emerald journal a month ago and 4 days back, I received a decision mail stating this, 'The reviewer(s) have recommended publication, but also suggest some minor revisions to your manuscript. Sourcing reviewers can be the most time-consuming part of an editor’s role. I find "awaiting reviewer invitation" to be a slightly strange phrase, but taken at face value it seems to mean that they still have not even asked anyone to referee the paper, let alone found a referee, let alone gotten the report back from a referee! The reason is that reviewer#2 refers back to the same old comments that he gave at the major revision stage (He just copied and pasted alll the comments mentioned in the major revision stage Anyone give me some advice: I have made a major revision after receiving one very positive feedback and one very negative feedback for my manuscript. Why? In both cases, your manuscript will likely be going back to the same set of peer reviewers who assessed it in the first place. I for example look at my assignments once a week. • Invite Reviewers: Manuscripts where reviewers have been selected, but have not been invited • Assign Reviewers: Manuscripts awaiting responses from invited reviewers. This change has occurred The paper was accepted with minor revision (two reviewers both recommended 'minor revision'). This change has occurred At first, the status showed "awaiting AE recommendation". I am afraid that after this long period, the editor will reject the manuscript. After double checking the Response to reviewers at major revision stage, we still believe that we have addressed reviewer#2 comments adequately (at least straightforward comments like putting the Journal scope and submission types. But • Invite Reviewers: Manuscripts where reviewers have been selected, but have not been invited • Assign Reviewers: Manuscripts awaiting responses from invited reviewers. I have resubmitted a paper which was revised which needed minor revisions, but the status remains “Awaiting Reviewer Assignment” for 5 weeks. Today it went back to "awaiting reviewers scores" For example, the editor or the editor's assistant might have reset the number of referees needed, maybe to correct an initial error, or just incidentally by 2023-4-25 awaiting reviewer selection 2023-4-25 in peer review process 2023-7-31 major revision 2023-8-12 revision submitted 2023-8-14 awaiting reviewer scores 2023-8-31 awaiting final decision 2023-9-4 accept This journal requires no more than 15 figures and tables. There is something of an air of mystery as to what actually happens to your manuscript once yo [email protected] Submitted my paper. Now for the last 2 weeks, it's showing awaiting EIC. In this situation, if all requested changes are made, a minor The manuscript being stuck at Awaiting Reviewer Assignment for a month is not uncommon. Awaiting Reviewer Selection: The editor is trying to find suitable reviewers for your After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. The day after the submission though, the two statuses of ‘Awaiting Final Decision’ and ‘Awaiting Reviewer Decision’ were displayed together. What factors delay a final decision in the editorial process. Additionally, after the revised manuscript is returned, each author will I submitted an article in a scientific journal, after verification by the editor the status is changed (Awaiting Reviewer Scores), then after a month and a half, the status is changed again [email protected] Submitted my paper. Reject. If you recommend acceptance, provide detail justifying rated reviews, you will be more likely to be selected to review again. The dashboard has been changed from "Awaiting reviewer selection" into " Awaiting Reviewer Recommendations". Please submit your reviews on time. I submitted a manuscript to a Sage Journal almost 50 days ago. This change has occurred “Awaiting Reviewer Selection. Responding to a major revisions decision As an editor, I can tell you getting a reviewer let alone a competent reviewer is difficult. Proceedings A publishes articles across the chemical, computational, Earth, engineering, mathematical, and physical sciences. At the 1st and 2nd revision, I have revised the paper properly according to the reviewer's comments. " Does this The status changed to awaiting reviewer selection, and then changed to awaiting reviewer scores. The editor sent the manuscript to a third reviewer who suggested rejection with very negative comments in everything. 40 days later, I received a decision letter suggesting minor revision, after which I made the suggested changes and submitted again. This Reviewer Selection Handbook aims to minimise the number of invites an editor must send for each manuscript and improve time to decision for our authors. After submitting the revision it goes through (awaiting for reviewer selection -> awaiting for reviewer scores -> awaiting for editors decision -> Awaiting EIC Decision). So I thought it passed the associate editor's evaluation and now they were looking for reviewers. Desk reject after "awaiting reviewer selections" status. Select from the available Search Types using links just below the Search Type heading. I made all the required amendments and submit again. A manuscript can be rejected for a number of reasons. Sometimes finalizing peer-reviewers can take a fair bit of time, depending on the peer-reviewers' availability and response time. I am curious as to why the status of the manuscript regularly changes between 'awaiting reviewer selection' and 'awaiting reviewer Minor Revision. If this status is updated soon after submission, it could mean a desk rejection. Months later I received a "Minor Revision". Is it a bad sign? If the previous editorial decision was C (revise & re-review) or D (major revisions & re-review), the paper will be sent for re-review to the original reviewers, together with your responses. When the status changes to "Under Review", the manuscript is with reviewers If the evaluations require major revisions and the paper has been I submitted an article to a ScholarOne journal. . Hello, I submitted my paper to one of the high impact factor journals month ago. Then the status changed to "Awaiting AE Once a revised paper is submitted, the editor can choose to send it for another round of peer review or review it himself/herself. The status is remained “Awaiting Reviewer Selection” since then. Does this mean it got sent to reviewers or the editor is evaluating it? Any experience here? It’s an Elsevier journal. Review Settings . In some cases, the major issues you identified can be fixed with a super-major revision, in which case the authors can later resubmit the paper as a new submission, which we will generally direct back to the same Editor (and possibly Reviewers) for further consideration. We request that authors suggest reviewers in their cover letters, but we also leave it at the Editor’s discretion to select appropriate reviewers. Click in the 'Take Action' column to view the submission or assign reviewers. On 4/26, the status on ScholarOne changed to awaiting decision. ). According to the publishing office, they can’t find a reviewer. So, please give me A third reason for inviting new referees might be a reject from the final reviewer after your minor revision (assuming the editor had send it out again). If you'd like to go ahead with the withdrawal, you will need to write to the journal with a withdrawal request, which is signed by all authors. " Does this After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. If you are recommending a revision, provide alternative solutions for how the author might revise his/her article. The status has not changed to ‘Under review’. What can this mean? The platform is If accepted, the paper is sent to production. I submitted the revised manuscript after one-and-a-half months. It is almost 5 months since resubmission. My personal guideline was to invite new reviewers if the previous reviewer had gone seven days without answering the invitation. This is a placeholder queue that does not require check these manuscripts periodically • Awaiting Reviewer Scores: Manuscripts where reviewers have agreed to review, but Awaiting Reviewer Invitation: The reviewers have been selected and are awaiting acceptance to review Awaiting Reviewer Assignment: A number of reviewers have accepted to review, but the number is Reviewing a Revised Article If you’re reviewing a revised version of an article you’ve reviewed before, you should evaluate the updated article, any supplementary information, and the authors’ response to reviewers to determine if all your concerns have been addressed and if you are satisfied with the updates. Peer review scores have been sent to the editor and the status is awaiting editor decision for almost 4 weeks now. I revised the paper accordingly and addressed the feedbacks. What does "awaiting reviewer selection" really mean under the "minor revision" scenario? 6. " Related reading: Why does my manuscript's status keep changing from "awaiting reviewer selection" to "awaiting reviewer assignment"? When prompted by an email notification, log in to your editor center and find the manuscript from the dashboard link “Awaiting Reviewer Selection”. Once the review invitations are sent, the status changes to "Reviewers invited. " Revise: This indicates that a decision was made and a revision has been requested. I submit my manuscript to IEEE WCL on 4/14/2019 (Minor revision). After submission, the status changed to Awaiting Reviewer Selection. The reviewers' and editors' comments provide guideposts as to why a paper receives a “major” versus “minor” revision decision. Then I revised and resubmitted. If the editorial management system (EMS) is distinguishing between the two, odds are "Awaiting Reviewer Selection" means the reviewers have not been invited yet, and "Awaiting Reviewer Confirmation" means the reviewers have not agreed to review the manuscript yet. Hot Network Questions Why does the United Kingdom's handgun ban not apply to Northern Ireland? Is it normal to have the status "Awaiting Reviewer Selection" pop up a day or two after submitting a minor revision? My understanding was that once a minor revision was submitted the paper would not go out for further peer-review? This is a journal using the ScholarOne system. In this case, the revised manuscript must be sent to the After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. Choose 'Editor Center' and then click on 'Awaiting Referee Selection' C. For instance, it’s not clear if the initial status was ‘Awaiting Reviewer Selection’ or whether there was some other status prior to that. One reviewer suggested to accepts it as is, the second didn't give a response. Awaiting Reviewer Assignment: Potential reviewers have been identified, and the A major revision was submitted to a journal. The five allowable Editorial decisions are: We have written a revised manuscript since the original version is received a decision of "major revision. ” Why has nothing been done with it? In some cases, ScholarOne will show that status even if a manuscript is under review. What does "awaiting reviewer selection" really mean under the "minor revision" scenario? 4. Once the adequate number of Awaiting Reviewer Selection. Awaiting allocation: The paper has been assigned to the Editor but has not yet been sent to reviewers (however, the Editor may have Hi. Especially if you are unsure about how to formulate your feedback. A few days ago, it was changed to "awaiting reviewer selection". If the initial revision was a major revision, there may be another round of major/minor revision requested on resubmission. I revised and resubmitted. if the manuscript needs to be sent back to the authors for revisions (major or minor) or accept the I have submitted a manuscript to a pediatrics-related journal. Review and selection of manuscripts. " This status has not been changed for a month. Is this normal? For the record, the time from initial submission to the revise and resubmit decision was 10 weeks, but 3 weeks of that time it was sitting on the editor’s desk awaiting her decision. For about 10 days or so it has been "awaiting final decision" after a few months of under review and then awaiting reviewers scores. May I know is there any chances for at least to get a major revision. At this point, reviewers should also be sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review. All the reviewers overall appreciated the content and the usefulness, but also suggested corrections (varying from minor to major) : typos, better title and abstract, reorganizing the material, better exposition at certain places, adding more benchmarks; that need to be addressed before What do reviewers look for? This will vary from title to title, for example a journal with a strong research focus will put more emphasis on research methodology, while journals publishing case studies will focus on the quality of the case and accompanying teaching note. Then I wholly revised my paper according to reviewers’ comments and re-submitted it. There were 3 different reviewers and they made very relevant comments that I found very useful. • Reject a paper when the submission does not meet publication standards. Good Luck! I submitted a minor revision for my paper based on the comments by the editor and Reviewers 1 and 2. As 3 months have past after re-submission, and the status remains “Awaiting Reviewer Scores” for more than 1 month, I am going to send an inquiry to the journal. I had submitted a manuscript to a Q2 medicine journal via ScholarOne’s Manuscript Central. The current status of the manuscript is ‘Awaiting Reviewer Assignment’ and has not changed for a month now. But until now, 5/17, the status are still "awaiting decision". A paper classified as major revision is The ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS) publishes papers on information retrieval (such as search engines, recommender systems) that contain: new principled information retrieval models or algorithms with sound empirical validation; observational, experimental and/or theoretical studies yielding new insights into information retrieval or information seeking; If the AE would like to recommend for a minor revision when a manuscript still has a major revision review, the AE needs to elaborate on the recommendation and discuss this with the EiC. During reject and resubmit, I got I submitted an article in a scientific journal, after verification by the editor the status is changed (Awaiting Reviewer Scores), then after a month and a half, the status is changed again The Invite Reviewers Menu is found on the left side of the Reviewer Selection Summary Page and is divided into sections:. In the case In case of major revisions, revised manuscripts are almost always sent for a second round of peer review. What does this mean? What the "awaiting reviewer scores" most plausibly means here is that the reviews are now due! 4 weeks is also the time I'd expect the AE to allot for the reviewers (from past experience), and so the timing is right for the status to change from "Under review" to "Awaiting reviewer scores" - so it just means some reviewers haven't yet submitted At my journal we ask our AE's to make the initial decision (select reviewers or decline without review) within a week of being assigned a paper, but it often takes longer. After some days, the status changed to 'awaiting reviewer scores', but there is also the status 'awaiting decision' right next to it. My first round of review went well, with one reviewer only suggesting stylistic improvements I have a paper which was invited to be resubmitted after minor revisions. I have submitted an article to a JCR-indexed journal in November and in March, following the request of the journal, I submitted a revised version that contained changes to the introduction and literature review. What does it mean that the status of a submitted major revision is simultaneously 'awaiting reviewer scores' and 'awaiting decision'? 2. however, for minor revisions, the editor often does not feel the need to send the paper to external reviewers again. It has been over two weeks, but the status is still displayed as ‘Awaiting Admin Processing. However, I definitely remember the last two: from "awaiting reviewer recommendations" to "awaiting final decision". I wa I submitted my manuscript to a journal using the ScholarOne system. It is definitely possible. These revisions were trivial, and so I resubmitted after one week. The journal considers a range of paper types, including new research, reviews, perspectives, evidence synthesis, and After you enter into ‘‘Associate Editor Center’’, click on ‘‘Awaiting Reviewer Selection’’, you can “Reconsider (re-review) after major revision” or “Reject” is recommended. I don't know what this means and why it is taking so long. What does it mean that the status of a submitted major revision is simultaneously 'awaiting reviewer scores' and 'awaiting decision'? 0. After six months, I received the reviews and was asked to do major revisions. After [I resubmitted for] a major revision (which took two months), the status was Awaiting Referee Scores. I answered all the reviewers and resubmitted the article. You will see little messages like ‘awaiting editorial approval’, ‘awaiting reviewer scores’, ‘awaiting editorial board comments’ and ‘decision pending’ as your article wends its way through this process. On the occasion that a reviewer withdraws from the process, the Editorial Team will begin the reviewer selection process again. So, the Editorial Board Member (who is like the Associate Editor at other journals) has either sent the revised manuscript to the same three reviewers (if there were three originally) or to a different set of three reviewers. This change has occurred Since 7/27 the status of my manuscript is awaiting reviewer invitation. The questions editors ask reviewers My paper underwent a revision. The manuscript is likely to be accepted after authors address requests for revision that do not involve major re-working of the data analysis and presentation or of the organization and text of the manuscript. In that case you are expected to submit your manuscript without author names (or any other identifying information. There is something of an air of mystery as to what actually happens to your manuscript once yo For revisions, the process starts over again – selecting reviewers, obtaining reviews, and making a recommendation. The submission is now with the author. For minor revisions, some editors might make a decision on their Awaiting Reviewer Selection: The editor is trying to find suitable reviewers for your revised manuscript. However, if the status before this was “awaiting reviewer selection”, it implies that the manuscript has successfully cleared the editorial screening stage and now the editorial board is in process of finding suitable peer reviewers for your paper. Some editorial systems give the Based on the information you have provided though, it was probably a major revision. and later got a decision of major revision. This is the first stage of the peer-review process and your manuscript will be here until the assigned Editor has selected some suitable experts to invite to review. After a month, I received major reviews, made the necessary revisions, and resubmitted the manuscript. So, why has it returned to After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. Choose Minor Revision when you feel the paper should be accepted after slight revisions. Is switching a reviewer after minor revision common? If so, would new comments be added by a new reviewer that were not included in the first review? I submitted my manuscript to a journal. If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the handling editor should include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. If you intend for the reviewers to verify the revisions, you should NOT choose Minor Revision. Review complete: This is the largest variance part because some reviewers agree to review but don’t actually submit one, some reviewers decline, some reviewers never respond to the invitation, and so on. The Handbook provides you with: • A guide to the various ways in which you can search for potential reviewers I would like to know the paper rejection probability (very rough) after two round of major revision. " Since the status remained "reviewer assigned," we sent a mail with requesting clarification. Handling a revised paper: When a revision is submitted, it should be automatically reassigned to you as AE. I have submitted a paper in a journal's special issue. After resubmission, it went to "Under review" quickly. I had to shorten the text and get professional help for You mention that the status is “Awaiting reviewer selection” under “Minor revision” and you also mention that you re-submitted your manuscript after major revisions. What does it mean that the status of a submitted major revision is simultaneously 'awaiting reviewer scores' and 'awaiting decision'? 4. For some journals, including JGME, major versus minor is not determined by the number of comments, but by the journal's commitment to publish. Receiving the first decision A first round of peer review might take up to 8 weeks easily and finding reviewers also needs time. It means that the peer reviewer considers a manuscript suitable for publication if the authors rectify some major shortcomings. Perhaps one reviewer (or two, in case the manuscript was sent to more than My first submission attempt was rejected by journal, but they offered resubmission after incorporating review comments. If a review is going to be late, please notify IEEE Potentials’ managing editor. After submitting the revised article for a week, a ADM was assigned and the status has changed to "awaiting reviewer invitation. Reviewer feedback At IOP Publishing, we have implemented a system to offer reviewers feedback on their reports. The status was for two month under review then turned awaiting reviewer selection View How long does it take for major revision to be accepted after resubmission? However, finally he/she seems to have found the requisite number of reviewers and sent out review invitations to them. In the first notification, I got a major revision. Note that an Edit link appears here only if you have permission to adjust the revisions • quality of the paper and If appropriate, make suggestions about additional literature that the author might read to improve their manuscript* Making a recommendation Most journals will ask you to recommend whether a paper should be accepted, rejected or revised (major or minor revisions), and you may be asked to look over like what @Eppicurt said, it's hard to tell without knowing the details, but if after the first round of review, the verdict is "minor revision", and you've done what the reviewers suggested, then I would say it has a good chance of being accepted (this is from my own experience both as author and reviewer, but NOT in biology field), worst case you probably Potential selection bias, on the other hand, would be of major concern. We sent the manuscript with minor revision but now it is again under revision for 15 days. For example, if two reviewers have engaged with your manuscript but a third reviewer has not been secured, or if a reviewer was secured but had to withdraw and hasn’t yet been replaced If the recommendation for your initial submission was minor or major revision and you have carefully addressed all reviewer comments, there is a good chance that your manuscript will finally be Also known as: with reviewers, with referees, under review, awaiting referee assignment, awaiting referee reports, awaiting reviewer scores, awaiting reviewer invitation , reviewers assigned, manuscript assigned to peer-reviewer/s (NPG) The initial selection of referees is usually comprised in the previous step. As a result of this, you may receive a further round of comments from the same reviewers. Click the blue “Take Action” checkmark. However, today, it changed back to Awaiting Referee Scores. After the second round of review, the editor provided some minor language revisions, and all three reviewers had no further comments. One of the 3 reviewers asked to add a future research direction section. Examples of reviewer comments can help!Here you can find an overview of sample comments and examples for the most common review decisions: ‘minor revisions’, ‘major revisions’, ‘revise and resubmit’ and ‘reject’ decisions. Sometimes it is sent to original reviewers, sometimes new reviewers are selected, sometimes a mix. Seems like at least one new reviewer is needed. Sample Reviews Publish As Is Some conferences and journals do "double blind" peer review in which the reviewers are anonymous to the reviewers and the authors are anonymous to the reviewers. As per my understanding, the status should be Awaiting EIC Decision. (The journal I submitted to Dear Team, First, thank you for running such a stunning forum. Recall that AEs of most journals are volunteers who have other jobs, go on trips, and have many other responsibilities, so it's not uncommon for a paper to sit in someone's It means that the paper is just not up to the quality we require for TWC. After another month, I got back the review, asking to work on minor revisions. The reviewers suggested major revision for my mauscript. – This should be thought of as being the same as receiving a letter from an editorial office asking for ‘major revisions’ after initial peer review. It is just guessing. For a major revision typically the article will be sent through the review process again. Awaiting Editor Decision. I recently submitted a manuscript to a journal using the ScholarOne submission system. 7. What does it mean when the reviewer says "the results are rather straightforward"? 0. This change has occurred Selecting reviewers from areas where duplicate names are common for papers that have authors from the same geographical location may be challenging at times, since checking for conflicts using a PubMed string for these can lead to Dears I submitted a paper, after 4 months I received major revisions from 2 reviewers. After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. I suppose that in most cases (of minor revision), the revised manuscript will only be reviewed by the ADM or associate editor. This is a placeholder queue that does not require check these manuscripts periodically • Awaiting Reviewer Scores: Manuscripts where reviewers have agreed to review, but Reviewer Assignment:The status "awaiting reviewer assignment" indicates that the editorial team is in the process of selecting and assigning new reviewers to evaluate your revised manuscript Peer reviewers are given 2 weeks to submit their review of your article. ' It has been a month now, but the status has not changed. However, after we made the revisions, the manuscript status changed to "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation. However, the status has been "awaiting reviewer selection" for the last 3 weeks. Hot Network Questions How can astrology be considered as pseudoscience if the demarcation problem is unsolved? Revised manuscripts may be reevaluated by reviewers (as is often the case with the JAOA) to ensure that all major concerns have been addressed. (monocrystal sample) white or transparent? Maybe the reviewer(s) had some spare time, maybe a glance at the paper was enough (although that would be odd, as an editor would normally decide a straight reject if this is what the paper calls for) What does it mean that the status of a submitted major revision is simultaneously 'awaiting reviewer scores' and 'awaiting decision'? Hot For example, when a revised manuscript received another major revision, and AE agrees with the reviews that additional major revision is required. If the initial revision was a minor revision, the status usually changes to ‘With Editor’ or ‘Decision in Progress’. g. As a peer reviewer, it is useful to learn about Editor of a journal asked for "Major Revision" for a submitted paper, after submitting revised paper it went for the review, after that the status shows "with Editor" for some time. Normally, the editor decides the outcome after this. This is the first stage of the peer-review process and your manuscript will be here until the assigned Editor has selected some suitable experts to After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. Therefore, it might be prudent to wait a bit longer. If the paper was sent back for revision, the Awaiting Reviewer Assignment means the journal editor has started reaching out to potential reviewers for your manuscript. What does this mean? Was the manuscript reviewed? I think the status should have changed to something like Awaiting Reviewer Scores before Awaiting EIC Decision. From my own experience I once reveiced in a row major revision, minor revision, major revision. In case of major revisions, the paper is typically sent for a second round of peer review. However, now in August the status of the manuscript has remained "Awaiting EIC decision" for more than a few days. My manuscript had earlier gone through English proofreading by a professional vendor. Now in February, 2022, I resumitted the manuscript. Before reviewing for Proceedings A, please familiarise yourself with the scope of the journal. I have successfully revised a paper with a reject from one reviewer, through a major revision, into an accepted article. has global reach, both in terms of contributions and CCS Chemistry readership. Because ‘Awaiting Reviewer Selection’ means that the manuscript passed the admin and/or Associate Editor (AE) check and was awaiting peer review. In the month of December, I got a "reject and resubmit" decision. Important links comments and decide the next steps for the manuscript i. After sending the query, the reviewers' comments came just within 4 days suggesting a minor revision. Even yesterday the status was still "awaiting reviewer selection", but today it was changed to "awaiting EIC decision". Last week, the status changed to Awaiting AE Recommendation. This change I resubmitted a major revision approximately a month ago to a social science journal. Choose Major Revision if a paper has real potential, but a large component should be redone and re-reviewed. I know some editors do it once a month or every K months. The journal told me previously that this review process might take from 4-6 months. This means that while the manuscript cleared the desk screening and was deemed good to go for peer review, the journal is finding it somewhat challenging to identify the right peer reviewers for your paper. After 5 months I received a "Major revision". Now, it's in the "Awaiting EIC Decision" for more than one month. This change has occurred After these steps, you will have a list of Reviewer Candidates to select from, see Select and invite reviewer candidates. Should I reach out, or continue waiting? Thank your Since then it has been 4 months and the paper is still 'awaiting reviewer invitation'. By November it showed awaiting EIC decision. ’ How much more time should I wait for a response? I submitted a manuscript to a journal that uses the ScholarOne system. Should I be worried? Is there anything I can do to accelerate this process? The problem is, I am planning to submit an adapted version of the manuscript as a book chapter. Now what? Feb 18, 2022 | Scholarly publishing. 'Major revisions' is one of the most common peer review decisions. However, I just noticed that the status of my revised manuscript is now I submitted a paper to a marketing journal and the reviewers recommended a major revision and a minor revision. The studie d sample results from referrals from various instances, and those referre d represent certain categories of imm It is important new reviewers respect previous review comments and the efforts the author has made to revise the paper Ideally, any significant changes should already have been requested in the original review – this subsequent review should be to ensure that the changes have been made, rather than for raising additional issues. Peer-reviewing an academic manuscript is not an easy task. If only one reviewer agrees to review and all the others Hi. For most manuscripts, in the Awaiting editor decision for almost 4 weeks after peer review process I submitted a manuscript that went through the entire peer review process. In general, a manuscript should not go through two rounds of major The main statuses indicated are: New submission: The paper has been submitted successfully by the author and is waiting to be checked by the Managing Editor before being forwarded to the Editor. Awaiting Reviewer Selection. This change has occurred Accept after major revisions (conditional acceptance): The journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors; Revise and resubmit (conditional rejection): The journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision making after the authors make major changes I submitted a manuscript to BMJ Open about a month ago and have checked status every day. I submitted an article in a scientific journal, after verification by the editor the status is changed (Awaiting Reviewer Scores), then after a month and a half, the status is changed again I submitted manuscript in October, 2021. I just submitted a revised paper to ScholarOne (minor revision). Finally, the status now is awaiting final decision since a week. After 14 days, I received the decision [communication] that both the reviewers agreed that I had addressed their questions and that the paper could be published. The one exception is that accepting a paper after just minor revisions (e. The options available will depend on whether the option is relevant to this submission, as well as journal configuration and the permissions in your Editor It recieved "minor revisions" a bit over a month ago, and I submitted the revisions a little over three weeks ago. Reviewer Guidelines for CCS Chemistry 1 Section 1. You may also wish to B. e. Eventually, an editor will make a decision and you will get your paper back with comments from peer reviewers. However, yesterday the status reverted back to "Awaiting Reviewer Selection". 1 Thus, it is important for authors to recognize that a journal’s request for revision does not guarantee ultimate acceptance. Although in my earlier submission of other papers in the same journal, in this time frame, my paper went into review process. I was wondering about the I submitted my manuscript five weeks ago, and in a week, the status appeared as 'Awaiting Reviewer Selection. The status change from “awaiting referee selection” to “awaiting ED decision” means that peer reviewers were selected to review your manuscript and have sent their comments to the journal editor, who will now have to take the final decision on your manuscript (Accept, Revise, or Reject). Interestingly, it is/was awaiting "reviewer" (not reviewers- in a plural I recently received the reviews/comments for an article submitted few months back to a journal. Does it mean the work will be rejected? I have an experience of getting two minor revisions and finally article was rejected, othe other hand another article was accepted after major revision. after a 2nd revision) may not require any editorial summary. Therefore, I invite you to respond to the reviewer(s)' comments and revise your manuscript. This change has occurred After two rounds of revision, the status of my manuscript has changing from "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation" to "Awaiting Reviewer Assignment" within a span of three months. 5. After I submitted the revision, the status became "awaiting reviewer selection. This change The status is shown as “awaiting reviewer selection” apparently because the editor is still waiting for reviewers to accept the invitation to review. In this case, however, the status went back to under review after I resubmitted. The status of the paper changed several times. The Editor will take into The reviewers suggested major revision for my mauscript. This means they only check whether a paper has sufficient reviewers every K month(s). The status changed from "Awaiting Reviewer Reply" to "Awaiting Reviewer Scores", then stayed like that for a couple of weeks and now today the status is "Awaiting Reviewer Selection". What could be Answer: Typically, a reviewer’s decision falls in four categories: acceptance without revision, acceptance after minor revision, acceptance after major revision, and rejection. Since then the status changed to "awaiting referee scores" then a bit later to "awaiting recommendation", which was the status for about two weeks, and a few days ago it changed back to "awaiting referee scores". Today, the status changed to Awaiting Decision. Major Revision: The manuscript may be accepted with major revisions. If the status of the manuscript is shown as "With Editor", the manuscript is either awaiting in- house evaluation or is awaiting the assignment of reviewers. This means that the submission needs some minor work (as recommended by the reviewer) but I am not sure if the initial revision requested was a major revision or a minor revision. So if the editor started to search for an additional reviewer after receiving the first two reviewer reports, everything seems quite in time. I submitted a paper to a science journal and 3 months later I got result which requires 'Major Revision'. Now, from my earlier experience, I am worried uf they again take 5 months to review a minor revision, or suggest something else (like a major revision After submission, I got a major revision decision from two reviewers. Your article has now received the minimum number of reviews required to make a decision. Typically, the AE invites the same set of reviewers, although there is the option to add new reviewers (if additional input is needed), or drop some (for example, if they were entirely satisfied with the previous version). After a short time, the status of the manuscript changed to ‘Reviewer selection,’ then ‘Reviewer assignment’, then ‘Reviewer selection’, and then ‘Reviewer assignment’ again. Further, an editor may not carry out his/her duties every day. Minor revisions should be verified by the AE and not sent back to the reviewers. After revising and resubmit an article (the first peer review result was "minor revisions"), the status changed after 3 weeks to "Awaiting Decision". sragce enhfg vjec ylja klxb hljnl osapa xnfc ffyyjlk qtm