Updated on February 24th, three reviewers were given major revisions. Resubmitted on March 26th, all three reviewers have completed their review by April 16th. Waiting for good news, the handling by the chief editor is said to be quick.

(0) 讚！ | 科研民工2024

It is said that there are two reviewers in the system. Are there only two reviewers automatically assigned? In that case, there may be a higher chance of conflicting opinions between the two reviewers. If there are more than two reviewers, this situation is considered normal. The editor needs to wait for all reviewers' opinions, so they will manually change the status of "rrc" to "ur" in the system.

(0) 讚！ | here09

If the first two opinions are not very good, they should have been rejected early, or if there are significant differences of opinion, another reviewer will be invited to convert it to UR.

(0) 讚！ | g00dman

My paper should have been accepted by more than two reviewers, and the editor may be waiting for the remaining reviewers to finish their reviews. I am still waiting in the rrc.

(0) 讚！ | g00dman

So, have you always been an RRC?

(0) 讚！ | Xiaofei Chen

Bro, do you know how long the second review gives the reviewers? My two reviewers have been reviewing for 15 days and still haven't finished.

(0) 讚！ | 科研民工2024

Have you received feedback for your paper yet, buddy? Both of my reviewers have finished reviewing but haven't provided any feedback. Do we need at least three reviewers?

(0) 讚！ | aal2548

The major revision provided by the editor was two improvements and one drawback. However, after the major revision was completed, the editor was not satisfied with the format, as detailed in comment 575.

(0) 讚！ | laojing666

Could it be that there is a disagreement between the first two opinions, so you asked again?

(0) 讚！ | Xiaofei Chen

How are you doing after your RRC?

(0) 讚！ | Xiaofei Chen

May I ask a question?

(0) 讚！ | Xiaofei Chen

May I ask how your results are after the RRC and UR?

(0) 讚！ | Xiaofei Chen

Is there still hope for this cry for help? Where should I focus on making changes? I have revised it five times following the editor's suggestions.

(0) 讚！ | laojing666

Please translate the following paragraph into English: 4.10 RRC 2+** 2+** 2

(0) 讚！ | g00dman

The first revision had four reviewers, while only reviewers 1 and 3 responded in the second revision.

(0) 讚！ | QUWOUIQHDOI

On April 4th, I saw it change to RRC, and on April 6th, it turned into UR again.

(0) 讚！ | Xiaofei Chen

Help, help! After the second review, only the editor's own opinion remains: The paper is now more or less technically sound but the presentation is still seriously deficient as you have not fully addressed my comments. Considering the fact that this submission is marginal in terms of scope and novelty, the presentation needs to be outstanding. You need to review the recent IJMS papers to understand the quality requirements. Can you provide some help for this major revision? _(¦3」∠)_

(0) 讚！ | laojing666

Some seem to have completed the automatic RRC by two reviewers, and then it becomes UR after one or two days.

(0) 讚！ | here09

May I ask if you have ever submitted a manuscript to a journal and had it reviewed by the Reviewer Recommendation Committee (RRC), only to have it reassigned to the usual reviewer (UR) for review?

(0) 讚！ | Xiaofei Chen

Submission experience updated in real time
2.12 Submitted to WE
2.13 Rejected and resubmitted, editor provided 14 formatting suggestions
3.22 Rejected and resubmitted, requested to check again and remove markers
4.1 Submitted to WE
4.4 Under Review 2+** 2+** 0
4.7 Under Review 2+** 2+** 1

(0) 讚！ | g00dman

Can you check the review status on the public account now?

(0) 讚！ | Xiaofei Chen

Finally, after three major revisions and one minor revision, the manuscript was accepted. In summary, out of the four reviewers, one reviewer requested major revisions three times and then disappeared after the final revision, causing the editor to wait for half a month before deciding to move forward with the minor revision. The minor revision mainly focused on formatting issues, as the journal places a strong emphasis on formatting, which was consistently addressed throughout the entire process.

Overall, the quality of the manuscript has greatly improved, and we are grateful to the editor and reviewers for their efforts.

(1) 讚！ | 锅锅哥

Update! The revised version of 4.3 has been received and is back for revision. It was accepted directly after about four weeks (there were three reviewers in the first round, but only two reviewers provided feedback on the revision, both agreeing to publish. The third reviewer did not provide feedback, so the editor decided to accept it without waiting). Special thanks to the reviewers and editor for their efficiency! It took about 4 months from the first submission to acceptance (formatting changes took about a month each time, first review took a month, revision took a month, second review took a month, acceptance). It was still quite fast, so authors should try to improve the formatting as much as possible to speed up the submission process.

(0) 讚！ | here09

Update: 4.3 has been received.

(0) 讚！ | here09

Submitted on March 26th, still in the waiting queue, not sure why it's been so slow recently.

(0) 讚！ | ZL132