Turn around time

[vtucci]

I thought it might be good to start a thread on people's experiences with submission and turn around time for decision and then turn around time for publication.

Please identify the Journal and type of publication (i.e., original research, review article, case report, case series etc).

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[tbo]

Submitted an unsolicited review to a so-so journal on March 24 2006 and had it accepted on May 4 2006.

 

[relentless11]

Took about 2-3 weeks for the American Journal of Clinical Pathology to reply and say my paper (original research) was accepted with revisions. After revising, it took ~11 hours (i'm not kidding) for it to be fully accepted. Currently in press so would have to get back to you on how fast it for being published.

However if I recall my previous experience with Clinical Chemistry, it took about a 1-2 months from acceptance to publication. It was a few years back though..so I might be off by a few weeks. On average, based on my experiences with various other journals, it probably takes 1-3 months from acceptance to publication. While peer-review may take 1-4 weeks. Some journals may be faster, such as JAMA, NEJM, and Critical Care Medicine.

On a side note, the fastest rejection I got were from JAMA and NEJM . NEJM took 24 hours, while JAMA took 5 days. But this is not from peer-review, its more of pre-screening by the editors, and the reason being that they didn't think it was suitable for the journal, rather than just out right crappy. Haha.

 

[Surg Path]

relentless11,
You had the fortunate experience of a great journal. I also had this with a turn around for revision of about 3 weeks, and published online about 4 weeks later (this was Oncogene, NPG).

Many journals don't e-pub (ahead of print). More importantly, if a journal has a process for streamlining review through some net service, it will go quicker. I've had papers in no name journals take months for a response. My guess is lack of decent electronic submission process.

Also depends on impact of paper. If top editor wants, he/she will put manuscript on priority when sending out to peer review and things will likely happen fast.

Luckily we nop longer have to send manuscripts with photpgraphs of figures with text from a typewriter! So, anything within 3 months seems fair for now.

 

[relentless11]

Luckily we nop longer have to send manuscripts with photpgraphs of figures with text from a typewriter! So, anything within 3 months seems fair for now.

Ya know, some of our faculty told us about the days before xerox machines, and personal computers with word processing and illustrating programs. Can't imagine what it was like to even assemble a manuscript for submission, let alone the peer-review process!

 

[Scottish Chap]

I thought it might be good to start a thread on people's experiences with submission and turn around time for decision and then turn around time for publication.

Please identify the Journal and type of publication (i.e., original research, review article, case report, case series etc).

On avarage, for good journals, you're looking at six months from time of first submission to time of publication. Basic science papers are much more painful since revisions usually include more experiments, though I once had a JBC paper paper published online one month after submission because they accepted it without corrections or further experiments. Clinical papers are easier to get accepted for publication, but I found that they take much longer to make it to press--a Clinical Biochemistry paper I submitted took nine months to be published after we had it accepted and the peer-review process took around six months.

 

[PBandJ]

Wow, scottish chap, that's quick for the JBC paper. My manuscript (original research) was rejected by them (one good review, one bad), so I submitted to Biochemical Journal instead. All in all, it took about 7 months for my article to be accepted, after they requested some revisions (including more experimentation).