decision sent to author nature communications

Finally, we associated each author with a gender label (male/female) by using the Gender API service [21]. Corresponding author defined. Helmer M, Schottdorf M, Neef A, Battaglia D. Research: gender bias in scholarly peer review. 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 divided the journals in three tiers: (i) the flagship interdisciplinary journal (Nature), (ii) the discipline-specific sister journals (Nature Astronomy, Nature Biomedical Engineering, Nature Biotechnology, Nature Cell Biology, Nature Chemical Biology, Nature Chemistry, Nature Climate Change, Nature Ecology & Evolution, Nature Energy, Nature Genetics, Nature Geoscience, Nature Human Behaviour, Nature Immunology, Nature Materials, Nature Medicine, Nature Methods, Nature Microbiology, Nature Nanotechnology, Nature Neuroscience, Nature Photonics, Nature Physics, Nature Plants, Nature Structural & Molecular Biology), and (iii) the open-access interdisciplinary title (Nature Communications). 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. We however included transfers in all other analyses because we considered the analysed items as combinations of three attributes: paper, corresponding author, and journal to which the paper was submitted. Regarding gender bias, a study showed that blinding interviewees in orchestra interviews led to more females being hired [8]. For this analysis, we included direct submissions as well as transferred manuscripts, because the editorial criteria vary by journal and a manuscript rejected by one journal and transferred to another may then be sent out to review. . A test for equality of proportions for groups 1 and 2 for SBPR papers returned a significant difference (2=331.62, df=1, p value <0.001); the same test for group 2 and group 3 for SBPR papers also returned a significant difference (2=464.86, df=1, p value <0.001). As a co-author, i saw recently that our paper switched from status. However, we did not achieve a good fit, as per the binned plot of residuals against expected values, and the C-index (used to assess the discriminatory ability of standard logistic models) is 0.68, so well below the threshold of 0.8 for good fit. Concerning the institutions, we defined four categories according to their THE ranks and used these as a proxy for prestige: category 1 includes institutions with THE rank between 1 and 10 (corresponding to 7167 manuscripts, 6% of all manuscripts), category 2 is for THE ranks between 11 and 100 (25,345 manuscripts, 20% of all manuscripts), category 3 for THE ranks above 100 (38,772 manuscripts, 30% of all manuscripts), and category 4 for non-ranked institutions (57,170 manuscripts, or 45% of all manuscripts). Our results show that we cannot say that there is a significant difference between authors from prestigious institutions and authors from less prestigious institutions for DBPR-accepted manuscripts. 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'. I think the manuscript "under consideration" is an auto-update that appears as soon as an editor has been assigned. hoi4 what to do when capitulate. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings. To ascertain whether indeed any referee bias is present, we studied the acceptance rate by gender and review type. ~. editors waits for him to send his comments then they contact the author and make a decision on the basis of these reports and send you acceptance, rejection or revision based on their reports . May 2022 lewmar 185tt bow thruster parts Motivation: First decision to send out to review in 3 weeks, but then a very long delay to receiving a final decision. The decision involved a ruling on a motion to . The page is updated on an annual basis. For the sake of completeness, Table8 includes the number and percentages of rejected vs. out-to-review manuscripts for which the gender of the corresponding author was male, female, or NA. Most journals assign a manuscript number upon initial submission and send an automated notice to advise you of the number (if not now, the manuscript number will be assigned when the first editor is assigned). 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. EDR was the major contributor in writing the Discussion and Conclusions sections. In order to see whether author uptake could be accurately predicted based on author and journal characteristics, we attempted to fit logistic regression models to the data. Rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) is a pediatric malignancy of skeletal muscle lineage with an aggressive subtype caused by translocations involving . ->Editor assigned->Manuscript under consideration->Editor Decision StartedDecision sent to author->Waiting for revision Original letter from Ben Cravatt in early 2000 after our meeting at UCSF when he sent me a sample of his FP-biotin probe to test in my laboratory. As mentioned in the Methods section, we have used a commercial algorithm to attribute gender based on first names, and discarded records that could not be matched with accuracy greater than 80%. Submissions not complying with policy and guidelines receive an immediate (administrative) reject and are not forwarded to the review process (IEEE PSPB Operation Manual, 8.2.2.3) Authors are required to ensure before submission that their manuscripts are in full compliance with the magazine's submission policy and guidelines as outlined below. Decision-making: Theory and practic e 145. how to pronounce dandelion witcher. 2015;136(6):136977. Corrected proofs returned by author 5. 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 Editor has made a decision and requested you revise the submission. We are a world leading research, educational and professional publisher. The full model has a pseudo R2 of 0.03, and the binned plot of the models residuals against the expected values also shows a poor fit. Papers from more prestigious institutions are more likely to be sent to review than papers from less prestigious institutions, regardless of review type. Each review is due in ten days, and many of them do arrive in two weeks. Data includes 128,454 manuscripts received between March 2015 and February 2017 by 25 Nature-branded journals. reparationstapet kllare . 0000011063 00000 n 85,307,200 Downloads (in 2021) We excluded papers for which the post-review outcome was a revision and papers which were still under review; thus, the dataset for this analysis comprises 20,706 records of which 8934 were accepted and 11,772 were rejected. . We also performed logistic regression modelling with author update, out-to-review, and acceptance as response, and journal tier, author gender, author country, and institution as predictors. In Review. As a matter of fact, the models accuracy (as tested on a random sample of 20% of the data chosen as test set) is 0.88, and the model always predicts author choices for SB, which is the majority class. 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. 0000005880 00000 n 1991;81(5):104167. That is, authors that feel more vulnerable to implicit bias against the prestige of their institutional affiliation or their country tend to choose DBPR to prevent such bias playing a role in the editorial decision. We considered using citations as a proxy for the quality of published papers; however, this would have limited the dataset to the small number of published articles that have had time to accrue citations, given the low acceptance rate of the journals considered, and the fact that the dataset is recent in relation to when DBPR was introduced at the Nature journals. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. The system will also immediately post a preprint of your manuscript to the In Review section of Research Square, in easy-to-read HTML, and with a citeable DOI. The submission process has completed with either an Accept or Reject decision. . Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. Authors of accepted papers will receive proofs of their article about 15 business days after the decision is sent. Nature. When comparing acceptance rates by gender and regardless of review model, we observed that female authors are significantly less likely to be accepted than their male counterparts. Authors must sign into CTS with the email address to which the link was sent. The Alan Turing Institute, London, England, Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Faculty of Modern and Medieval Languages, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK, Springer Nature, 4 Crinan Street, London, UK, You can also search for this author in After making the decision, it is necessary to notify the authors. The area under the receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve is 0.40. 0000006171 00000 n 'Submission Transfers Waiting for Author's Approval'. Some research has not found conclusive results [6, 7], demonstrating the need for further large-scale systematic analyses spanning over journals across the disciplinary spectrum. Because the median is not subject to the . Some editors keep a paper for long time, more than 6 months or a year, without a decision and when send them a reminder message they do not reply or sometimes reply for the first time saying that . For this analysis, we used a subset of the 106,373 manuscripts consisting of 58,920 records with non-empty normalised institutions for which a THE rank was available (the Institution Dataset, excluding transfers) (Table4). An analysis of the journal Behavioral Ecology, which switched to DBPR in 2001, found a significant interaction between gender and time, reflecting the higher number of female authors after 2001, but no significant interaction between gender and review type [11]. . Google Scholar. Nature-branded journals publishing primary research introduced DBPR as an optional service in March 2015 in response to authors requests [17]. Figure1 shows a Cohen-Friendly association plot indicating deviations from independence of rows (countries) and columns (peer review model) in Table5. Internet Explorer). 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. A list of links to the Manuscript Tracking System login pages for each journal is available on the Nature Portfolio Journals A-Z webpage. This page provides information on peer review performance and citation metrics for Nature Communications. This study is the first one that analyses and compares the uptake and outcome of manuscripts submitted to scientific journals covering a wide range of disciplines depending on the review model chosen by the author (double-blind vs. single-blind peer review). (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The Eigenfactor Score calculation is based on the number of times articles from the journal published in the past five years have been cited in the JCR year, but it also considers which journals have contributed these citations so that highly cited journals will influence the network more than lesser cited journals. 2017;6:e21718. For further information, please contact Research Square at info@researchsquare.com. Please log in to your personal My Springer Nature profile and click on "Your submissions" to start tracking your articles. 9. How do I check the status of my manuscript? Decision sent to author NZip for reviewers Sorry we couldn't be helpful. 0000005727 00000 n 2023 BioMed Central Ltd unless otherwise stated. In order to assign a measure of institutional prestige to each manuscript, we used the 2016/2017 Times Higher Education rankings (THE [20]) and normalised the institution names using the GRID API. So, in October 2018, we added a new option for you when you submit to select Springer Nature journals. Are there differences related to gender or institution within the same review model? . This status will remain until an Editor takes an action in the system to change the status, usually inviting reviewers. On the other hand, an analysis of the Evolution of Language (EvoLang 11) conference papers found that female authors received higher rankings under DBPR [13]. 0000013595 00000 n Third review was never returned so decision was at least partly based on two reviews from the same discipline. Decide and Notify authors of decisions made on articles. JAMA. We then studied the manuscripts editorial outcome in relation to review model and authors characteristics. Download MP3 / 387 KB. To post social content, you must have a display name. The corresponding author takes responsibility for the manuscript during the submission, peer review and production process. References from one article in a journal to another article from the same journal are removed, so that Eigenfactor Scores are not influenced by journal self-citation. Manuscript Submission Guidelines: Natural Product Communications: SAGE Hb```f``5g`c`} 6Pc. 0000006193 00000 n Manage cookies/Do not sell my data we use in the preference centre. Uses field-specific PhD-qualified editors, editing to quality standards set by Nature Research. We observed that DBPR is chosen more often by authors submitting to higher impact journals within the Nature portfolio, by authors from specific countries (India and China in particular, among countries with the highest submission rates), and by authors from less prestigious institutions. 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". 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. The Nature Portfolio Bioengineering Community is a community blog for readers and authors of Nature Research journals, including Nature Biomedical Engineering, Nature Biotechnology, Nature . When action from your side is required, this will also be announced by email. Nature CommunicationsTips: NCOnline: 140 250 tips (Naturetransfer) NCzip"Zip of files for Reviewer" 2-4 2. 9.3 weeks. There are several factors that influence the time taken for review, most notably availability of article referees. We studied whether papers were accepted or rejected following peer review, and we included transfers because the editorial decisions as different journals follow different criteria. Watch the Checking the status of your submission video for more information. The Editors may take time to discuss the reviews and may invite more reviewers or assign another editor, returning the submission to an earlier status. You can see an example in the article above. Table14 shows acceptance rate by institution group, regardless of review type. The full model has a pseudo R2 of 0.05, and the binned plot of the models residuals against the expected values also shows a poor fit. Locate the submission in Submission Requiring Author Approval or Revisions Requiring Author Approval, and see here for more details. (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The 5-year journal Impact Factor, available from 2007 onward, is the average number of times articles from the journal published in the past five years have been cited in the JCR year. After peer review, a decision of accept, reject, or revision is made on the basis of the reviewers comments and the judgment of the editor. As a consequence, we are unable to distinguish bias towards author characteristics or the review model from any quality effect, and thus, we cannot draw definitive conclusions on the efficacy of DBPR in addressing bias. Moreover, some records were not complete if authors made spelling mistakes when entering the names of their country or institution, as this would have made it impossible to match those names with normalised names for countries or for institutions using GRID. We understand that you have not received any journal email. In order to see whether the final decision outcome could be accurately predicted based on author and journal characteristics, we attempted to fit logistic regression models to the data. isolera golv plintgrund This agreement provides: A supported path for UC authors to publish open access in Springer's subscription-based and open access journals, including Springer, Springer Open, BioMed . BMcG was the major contributor in writing the Background and Methods sections. 2016;14(1):85. Is my manuscript likely to be peer reviewed by now? - Editage Insights Just select the In Review option when you submit your next article to one of the participating journals. Impact of interventions to improve the quality of peer review of biomedical journals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Communications (max. Paginate and make available the correction notice in the online issue of the journal. (Courtesy of Clarivate Analytics), The Article Influence Score determines the average influence of a journal's articles over the first five years after publication. . Our commitment to early sharing and transparency in peer review inspires us to think about how to help our authors in new ways. Find submission status of your article / manuscript - Nature Support Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Is double-blinded peer review necessary? For DBPR papers, we found a statistically significant difference in the OTR rate by gender (2=7.5042, df=1, p value=0.006155); for SBPR papers, we did not find a statistically significant difference in the OTR rate by gender (2=0.72863, df=1, p value=0.3933). the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in See How does the Article Transfer Service work for authors? . We employed descriptive statistics for data exploration, and we tested our hypotheses using Pearsons chi-square and binomial tests. How Many Seats Are Premium Economy On Emirates A380? Are there differences related to gender or institution within the same review model? Authors will be able to track peer review on their private author dashboard. The meaning of 'reject & resubmit' is to indicate that in principle the editor likes the topic for their journal, but the current paper is . In any 6-month period, manuscripts can be under editorial assessment . 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.