Read on Twitter
Frustrated about long delays in processing, rejections, and manuscripts being returned for formatting reasons? As an editor (and an author) here are some thoughts & tips. Happy to answer questions @EricTopol
@mtmdphd @SagarLonialMD
@Mohty_EBMT @DrAnasYounes @BldCancerDoc
1/
https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="👇" title="Down pointing backhand index" aria-label="Emoji: Down pointing backhand index">
@mtmdphd @SagarLonialMD
@Mohty_EBMT @DrAnasYounes @BldCancerDoc
1/
2/ No one is intentionally delaying your paper. The #1 cause of delay is difficulty finding reviewers. Reviewers you suggest often turn us down stating they are your friends & colleagues! Please suggest 4 reviewers that are experts in the field who are 𝙣𝙤𝙩 close associates.
3/ Reviewers can be glowing in comments to authors but very negative in comments to the editors. Most of us don’t necessarily take the reviewers comments as gospel. We do make an independent assessment and then decide. So please do not assume that we ignored a “great” peer review
4/ Sometimes reviewers get the facts or concepts wrong. If you have a strong case, most editors are willing to entertain a request to reconsider. So please email or call the editor. But it has to be a legitimate issue, not a disagreement simply over the importance of the paper.
5/ A rejection letter that says “inadequate priority” is often used as a polite way of conveying that the paper is not suitable. It’s hard to run a Journal, and there are many many considerations. So my suggestion is to move on and not fight or disparage the editors.
6/ Not all editors control all aspects of publishing. So although I’m of the view formatting does not matter it doesn’t mean I’m in a position to change the rules. For Journals I’m working for, Ive advocated for eliminating most formatting requirements for the initial submission
7/ Preliminary letters asking about the suitability of a paper does help. But keep the email brief. Send the abstract as an attachment.
8/ Support Journals you frequently write for by reviewing for them. It definitely helps to build a relationship. Be timely with returning peer reviews you agreed to; the authors are anxiously waiting.
9/ I should have said this earlier. Often the reviewers you suggest thinking they are “friendly” are the ones who are really hard on the paper! Once again, when suggesting reviewers pick them by expertise. Not based on who you think will be kind to you.
10/ Definitely suggest people you do 𝙣𝙤𝙩 want reviewing your paper. Editors almost always respect your request.
I’m sure other editors on Twitter may have additional tips. Please add.