Awaiting reviewer selection after major revision example. However, today, it changed back to Awaiting Referee Scores.

Awaiting reviewer selection after major revision example after a 2nd revision) may not require any editorial summary. " Does this The status changed to awaiting reviewer selection, and then changed to awaiting reviewer scores. After six months, I received the reviews and was asked to do major revisions. By November it showed awaiting EIC decision. After resubmission, it went to "Under review" quickly. Sometimes it is sent to original reviewers, sometimes new reviewers are selected, sometimes a mix. • Invite Reviewers: Manuscripts where reviewers have been selected, but have not been invited • Assign Reviewers: Manuscripts awaiting responses from invited reviewers. The reviewers suggested major revision for my mauscript. Seems like at least one new reviewer is needed. So I thought it passed the associate editor's evaluation and now they were looking for reviewers. 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. After submission, the status changed to 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. 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. The Editor will take into The reviewers suggested major revision for my mauscript. I don't know what this means and why it is taking so long. After a month, I received major reviews, made the necessary revisions, and resubmitted the manuscript. 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. As per my understanding, the status should be Awaiting EIC Decision. This change I resubmitted a major revision approximately a month ago to a social science journal. 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. In the month of December, I got a "reject and resubmit" decision. ' It has been a month now, but the status has not changed. What does it mean that the status of a submitted major revision is simultaneously 'awaiting reviewer scores' and 'awaiting decision'? 4. 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. One reviewer suggested to accepts it as is, the second didn't give a response. 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. 7. 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. 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. 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. 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. 1 Thus, it is important for authors to recognize that a journal’s request for revision does not guarantee ultimate acceptance. After 5 months I received a "Major revision". What does it mean when the reviewer says "the results are rather straightforward"? 0. Then I wholly revised my paper according to reviewers’ comments and re-submitted it. 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. Review and selection of manuscripts. 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. Especially if you are unsure about how to formulate your feedback. 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. If you intend for the reviewers to verify the revisions, you should NOT choose Minor Revision. In the case In case of major revisions, revised manuscripts are almost always sent for a second round of peer review. However, yesterday the status reverted back to "Awaiting Reviewer Selection". However, now in August the status of the manuscript has remained "Awaiting EIC decision" for more than a few days. I for example look at my assignments once a week. 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. 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. Hello, I submitted my paper to one of the high impact factor journals month ago. Therefore, it might be prudent to wait a bit longer. What can this mean? The platform is If accepted, the paper is sent to production. 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. 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. 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. 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. Reviewer Guidelines for CCS Chemistry 1 Section 1. 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. 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. This means they only check whether a paper has sufficient reviewers every K month(s). I submitted the revised manuscript after one-and-a-half months. Select from the available Search Types using links just below the Search Type heading. But until now, 5/17, the status are still "awaiting decision". I submitted a manuscript to a Sage Journal almost 50 days ago. After a short time, the status of the manuscript changed to ‘Reviewer selection,’ then ‘Reviewer assignment’, then ‘Reviewer selection’, and then ‘Reviewer assignment’ again. I revised the paper accordingly and addressed the feedbacks. Choose Minor Revision when you feel the paper should be accepted after slight revisions. 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. 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". Now what? Feb 18, 2022 | Scholarly publishing. Sometimes finalizing peer-reviewers can take a fair bit of time, depending on the peer-reviewers' availability and response time. Eventually, an editor will make a decision and you will get your paper back with comments from peer reviewers. A few days ago, it was changed to "awaiting reviewer selection". 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. The submission is now with the author. 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. If this status is updated soon after submission, it could mean a desk rejection. What does "awaiting reviewer selection" really mean under the "minor revision" scenario? 6. It has been over two weeks, but the status is still displayed as ‘Awaiting Admin Processing. 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). Responding to a major revisions decision As an editor, I can tell you getting a reviewer let alone a competent reviewer is difficult. I made all the required amendments and submit again. The dashboard has been changed from "Awaiting reviewer selection" into " Awaiting Reviewer Recommendations". I am afraid that after this long period, the editor will reject the manuscript. 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. At the 1st and 2nd revision, I have revised the paper properly according to the reviewer's comments. It is almost 5 months since resubmission. Even yesterday the status was still "awaiting reviewer selection", but today it was changed to "awaiting EIC decision". Major revisions It is very unusual for a paper to be accepted without needing any revisions. I have resubmitted a paper which was revised which needed minor revisions, but the status remains “Awaiting Reviewer Assignment” for 5 weeks. There were 3 different reviewers and they made very relevant comments that I found very useful. 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. I recently submitted a manuscript to a journal using the ScholarOne submission system. Minor revisions should be verified by the AE and not sent back to the reviewers. Peer review scores have been sent to the editor and the status is awaiting editor decision for almost 4 weeks now. 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:. " 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”. 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 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. 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. 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. 5. However, today, it changed back to Awaiting Referee Scores. Handling a revised paper: When a revision is submitted, it should be automatically reassigned to you as AE. You may also wish to B. 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. 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. 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. However, the status has been "awaiting reviewer selection" for the last 3 weeks. Your article has now received the minimum number of reviews required to make a decision. ’ How much more time should I wait for a response? I submitted a manuscript to a journal that uses the ScholarOne system. 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. 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. It is definitely possible. Although in my earlier submission of other papers in the same journal, in this time frame, my paper went into review process. 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. Please submit your reviews on time. So if the editor started to search for an additional reviewer after receiving the first two reviewer reports, everything seems quite in time. Once the adequate number of Awaiting Reviewer Selection. Reviewer feedback At IOP Publishing, we have implemented a system to offer reviewers feedback on their reports. Review Settings . 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. Therefore, I invite you to respond to the reviewer(s)' comments and revise your manuscript. Because ‘Awaiting Reviewer Selection’ means that the manuscript passed the admin and/or Associate Editor (AE) check and was awaiting peer review. 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. I submit my manuscript to IEEE WCL on 4/14/2019 (Minor revision). It means that the peer reviewer considers a manuscript suitable for publication if the authors rectify some major shortcomings. 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. 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. The reviewers' and editors' comments provide guideposts as to why a paper receives a “major” versus “minor” revision decision. Does this mean it got sent to reviewers or the editor is evaluating it? Any experience here? It’s an Elsevier journal. 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. 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. I have successfully revised a paper with a reject from one reviewer, through a major revision, into an accepted article. 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. Further, an editor may not carry out his/her duties every day. 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. Reject. In the first notification, I got a major revision. Should I reach out, or continue waiting? Thank your Since then it has been 4 months and the paper is still 'awaiting reviewer invitation'. What does "awaiting reviewer selection" really mean under the "minor revision" scenario? 4. From my own experience I once reveiced in a row major revision, minor revision, major revision. 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. If you wanna know in detail what is going on, the only option you have, is to e-mail the editor. 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. After submitting the revised article for a week, a ADM was assigned and the status has changed to "awaiting reviewer invitation. I just submitted a revised paper to ScholarOne (minor revision). Receiving the first decision A first round of peer review might take up to 8 weeks easily and finding reviewers also needs time. I am curious as to why the status of the manuscript regularly changes between 'awaiting reviewer selection' and 'awaiting reviewer Minor Revision. " Since the status remained "reviewer assigned," we sent a mail with requesting clarification. This change has occurred The paper was accepted with minor revision (two reviewers both recommended 'minor revision'). The status is remained “Awaiting Reviewer Selection” since then. After the second round of review, the editor provided some minor language revisions, and all three reviewers had no further comments. – 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. 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. If only one reviewer agrees to review and all the others Hi. Sourcing reviewers can be the most time-consuming part of an editor’s role. 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". 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. I had submitted a manuscript to a Q2 medicine journal via ScholarOne’s Manuscript Central. Months later I received a "Minor Revision". 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. On the occasion that a reviewer withdraws from the process, the Editorial Team will begin the reviewer selection process again. The reviewer has raised a new issue in the 2nd revision and the reviewer has recommended me to revise the paper again. 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. After submitting the revision it goes through (awaiting for reviewer selection -> awaiting for reviewer scores -> awaiting for editors decision -> Awaiting EIC Decision). Awaiting Reviewer Selection. Once the review invitations are sent, the status changes to "Reviewers invited. Major Revision: The manuscript may be accepted with major revisions. I wa I submitted my manuscript to a journal using the ScholarOne system. The questions editors ask reviewers My paper underwent a revision. I know some editors do it once a month or every K months. 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). 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. Now for the last 2 weeks, it's showing awaiting EIC. Then I revised and resubmitted. 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. I was wondering about the I submitted my manuscript five weeks ago, and in a week, the status appeared as 'Awaiting Reviewer Selection. Last week, the status changed to Awaiting AE Recommendation. 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. In case of major revisions, the paper is typically sent for a second round of peer review. Today, the status changed to Awaiting Decision. Choose 'Editor Center' and then click on 'Awaiting Referee Selection' C. Awaiting Reviewer Assignment: Potential reviewers have been identified, and the A major revision was submitted to a journal. But • Invite Reviewers: Manuscripts where reviewers have been selected, but have not been invited • Assign Reviewers: Manuscripts awaiting responses from invited reviewers. One of the 3 reviewers asked to add a future research direction section. Click in the 'Take Action' column to view the submission or assign reviewers. 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). However, after we made the revisions, the manuscript status changed to "Awaiting Reviewer Invitation. Now in February, 2022, I resumitted the manuscript. For a major revision typically the article will be sent through the review process again. Peer-reviewing an academic manuscript is not an easy task. Once enough reviewers have been selected, the manuscript will move on to the next stage. " Revise: This indicates that a decision was made and a revision has been requested. The status has not changed to ‘Under review’. Awaiting allocation: The paper has been assigned to the Editor but has not yet been sent to reviewers (however, the Editor may have Hi. 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. 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. If the initial revision was a major revision, there may be another round of major/minor revision requested on resubmission. For some journals, including JGME, major versus minor is not determined by the number of comments, but by the journal's commitment to publish. We request that authors suggest reviewers in their cover letters, but we also leave it at the Editor’s discretion to select appropriate reviewers. 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. 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. It is just guessing. 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. 'Major revisions' is one of the most common peer review decisions. 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. The editor sent the manuscript to a third reviewer who suggested rejection with very negative comments in everything. 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. A manuscript can be rejected for a number of reasons. At this point, reviewers should also be sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review. 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. The five allowable Editorial decisions are: We have written a revised manuscript since the original version is received a decision of "major revision. Awaiting Editor Decision. Click the blue “Take Action” checkmark. 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. (The journal I submitted to Dear Team, First, thank you for running such a stunning forum. We sent the manuscript with minor revision but now it is again under revision for 15 days. What factors delay a final decision in the editorial process. Normally, the editor decides the outcome after this. My manuscript had earlier gone through English proofreading by a professional vendor. I revised and resubmitted. ” Why has nothing been done with it? In some cases, ScholarOne will show that status even if a manuscript is under 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. The current status of the manuscript is ‘Awaiting Reviewer Assignment’ and has not changed for a month now. There is something of an air of mystery as to what actually happens to your manuscript once yo [email protected] Submitted my paper. " 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. Before reviewing for Proceedings A, please familiarise yourself with the scope of the journal. As a result of this, you may receive a further round of comments from the same reviewers. If the initial revision was a minor revision, the status usually changes to ‘With Editor’ or ‘Decision in Progress’. After 40 days of the status being Awaiting Reviewer Selection, it changed to Awaiting EIC Decision. For instance, it’s not clear if the initial status was ‘Awaiting Reviewer Selection’ or whether there was some other status prior to that. 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. 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. 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. 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. On 4/26, the status on ScholarOne changed to awaiting decision. The day after the submission though, the two statuses of ‘Awaiting Final Decision’ and ‘Awaiting Reviewer Decision’ were displayed together. 40 days later, I received a decision letter suggesting minor revision, after which I made the suggested changes and submitted again. You will now see a list of your assignments. e. After revising and resubmit an article (the first peer review result was "minor revisions"), the status changed after 3 weeks to "Awaiting Decision". 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. 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. My personal guideline was to invite new reviewers if the previous reviewer had gone seven days without answering the invitation. I submitted a paper to a science journal and 3 months later I got result which requires 'Major Revision'. 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. ). 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. . 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. I answered all the reviewers and resubmitted the article. Now, it's in the "Awaiting EIC Decision" for more than one month. This change has occurred Since 7/27 the status of my manuscript is awaiting reviewer invitation. Good Luck! I submitted a minor revision for my paper based on the comments by the editor and Reviewers 1 and 2. Choose Major Revision if a paper has real potential, but a large component should be redone and re-reviewed. This change has occurred After these steps, you will have a list of Reviewer Candidates to select from, see Select and invite reviewer candidates. 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. What does it mean that the status of a submitted major revision is simultaneously 'awaiting reviewer scores' and 'awaiting decision'? 0. 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. Important links comments and decide the next steps for the manuscript i. This change has occurred “Awaiting Reviewer Selection. What does it mean that the status of a submitted major revision is simultaneously 'awaiting reviewer scores' and 'awaiting decision'? 2. After another month, I got back the review, asking to work on minor revisions. 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. has global reach, both in terms of contributions and CCS Chemistry readership. In this case, however, the status went back to under review after I resubmitted. After some days, the status changed to 'awaiting reviewer scores', but there is also the status 'awaiting decision' right next to it. Finally, the status now is awaiting final decision since a week. In that case you are expected to submit your manuscript without author names (or any other identifying information. and later got a decision of major revision. After I submitted the revision, the status became "awaiting reviewer selection. 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. (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. This change has occurred At first, the status showed "awaiting AE recommendation". I suppose that in most cases (of minor revision), the revised manuscript will only be reviewed by the ADM or associate editor. If you recommend acceptance, provide detail justifying rated reviews, you will be more likely to be selected to review again. g. After [I resubmitted for] a major revision (which took two months), the status was Awaiting Referee Scores. If a review is going to be late, please notify IEEE Potentials’ managing editor. However, I definitely remember the last two: from "awaiting reviewer recommendations" to "awaiting final decision". 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 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. " This status has not been changed for a month. The one exception is that accepting a paper after just minor revisions (e. however, for minor revisions, the editor often does not feel the need to send the paper to external reviewers again. The journal told me previously that this review process might take from 4-6 months. 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. • Reject a paper when the submission does not meet publication standards. Some editorial systems give the Based on the information you have provided though, it was probably a major revision. I have submitted a paper in a journal's special issue. The status of the paper changed several times. For about 10 days or so it has been "awaiting final decision" after a few months of under review and then awaiting reviewers scores. These revisions were trivial, and so I resubmitted after one week. After sending the query, the reviewers' comments came just within 4 days suggesting a minor revision. May I know is there any chances for at least to get a major revision. 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. If you are recommending a revision, provide alternative solutions for how the author might revise his/her article. According to the publishing office, they can’t find a reviewer. Proceedings A publishes articles across the chemical, computational, Earth, engineering, mathematical, and physical sciences. Desk reject after "awaiting reviewer selections" status. 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. egqzp yvn juhxnm coudgov jedgi ggqwl jtoy fhwxq lgef sqvqiy