May I ask if anyone has encountered a situation where there is a first review, followed by a gathering, a major revision, and a minor revision? The editor finally said that the draft can be revised and resubmitted, and the article has now been revised. It is currently in the hands of the reviewer, how long will the second review take approximately? Is there hope for acceptance? Or is there a high probability of rejection? Thank you all, and I wish everyone success in publishing articles.

(0) 讚！ | 打工小吴 卑微在线

I, too, have received the same first-instance result as you, and it's been 9 days since the second-instance appeal was submitted. Feeling very anxious

(0) 讚！ | 八卦灵珊

How is your article coming along?

(0) 讚！ | 八卦灵珊

Hey, buddy, why can't I see the evaluation from my reviewer? I can only see the specific comments. Oh, and how did you end up?

(0) 讚！ | 星熊雅秀

May I ask what is the situation when it changes to "awaiting decision" after the second review, and then becomes "in peer-review" again?

(0) 讚！ | 不吃葱姜蒜

I would like to ask, what does it mean when it says "awaiting decision" after the first round of revisions, and then it says "in peer-review"?

(0) 讚！ | 不吃葱姜蒜

Research focus: Life sciences
Sharing of experiences: The efficiency of NAR is really high. The first review was completed in two weeks. After giving half a year for revisions, the manuscript was accepted half a day after resubmission

(0) 讚！ | 骏年baby

It is the fourth day and still in editorial review

(0) 讚！ | 会心宜然

Research focus: Infectious diseases; Sharing molecular diagnostic experiences: Submitted yesterday, currently in the editorial review stage, feeling anxious

(0) 讚！ | 会心宜然

Review speed: 3.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 50.0 
Focus research areas: Microbial detection; Infectiology; Molecular diagnostics 
Experience sharing: Just submitted yesterday morning, currently in editorial review stage. This is the first article I have published since graduating with my master's degree last year and also the first article published in a new field. Wish me luck~

(0) 讚！ | 会心宜然

May I ask what happened to you afterwards?

(0) 讚！ | 北国硕泽

What are your plans next?

(0) 讚！ | 北国硕泽

In the first round of review, there were three reviewers. One gave a reject, one felt it was major, and the last one minor. After the editor requested major revisions, the revised manuscript has been in peer-review for over a month now, longer than the initial review process. It feels like it might not be accepted in the end

(0) 讚！ | 摩柯平安

Transcription factors can not only directly bind to DNA, but also need to bind to other proteins, both of which are present in our research. Specific opinions have been seen, which is to reject, but allow resubmission after major revisions. Reviewers have no objections to the novelty of the work, but initially found the conclusions not generalized enough, so a large number of experiments verifying other tissue cells have been added for resubmission within 1-2 months

(0) 讚！ | 金山兴发

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission hit rate: 25.0
Emphasized research direction: Transcription factors
Experience sharing: I shared some insights before. NAR's feedback is quite detailed; there are two types of rejection. One is a complete rejection, even if you add more data, you cannot resubmit. The second type of rejection allows for resubmission but requires significant revisions. The article needs to be rewritten, the data structure needs adjustment, and additional data needs to be provided. The third type of rejection is what you called a major revision, which means making significant revisions according to the reviewer's requirements. The editor will specify which type of rejection it is. Generally speaking, the first type of rejection means that they feel your innovation is lacking or there are serious issues with the core data. In our case, it is the second type. The editor allows for resubmission. One of the reviewers' comments is a bit harsh. They find the quality of all the Western blot images inadequate and feel that the conclusions are not generalized enough. Of course, there are also several specific modifications or additional experiments required. The issue of generalization is quite interesting; why not try applying the conclusions reached in heart research to tumors, for example. Anyway, let's keep working hard, and hopefully, luck will be on our side

(0) 讚！ | 金山兴发

We who work on transcription factors together feel sorry for ourselves, feeling that transcription factors have no good protein interactions at all

(0) 讚！ | 星熊雅秀

NC has not tried, molecular cell, cell reports and NAR have all been submitted, molecular cell has not been sent for external review, cell reports has had minor revisions, and this NAR is still undergoing major revisions. Cell reports is relatively easy, the review process is very fast, as long as the editor agrees to send it for external review, it is generally possible to revise it

(0) 讚！ | 金山兴发

In the editor's hands, a manuscript that has been held for a long time usually will not be sent out for external review

(0) 讚！ | 金山兴发

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission hit rate: 25.0
Research focus: Transcription factors
Sharing experience: I have been reading others' experience all day and now it's my turn to share. Recently, I submitted a paper and it was sent for external review quickly. After 3 weeks, it was rejected without any comments yet as my boss was away on a business trip. I thought I could revise it, but I don't know what the issue is. I feel like my work is meticulous, although it may not be groundbreaking enough for a journal like Nature, but it does report some new findings for the first time. It seems like the impact factor of NAR keeps increasing, making it harder to get published there. I'm considering trying a few other journals with impact factors above 10

(0) 讚！ | 金山兴发

Share the experience of submission:

2022.01.06 - Submitted
2022.01.27 - In peer review (I emailed the administrative secretary of NAR to ask why it was taking so long, and she said they hadn't initially found enough reviewers. The status would only change once they had found all the reviewers. In other words, one or two reviewers have already accepted the review.)
2022.02.17 - Revision (Received reviewer comments from three reviewers. Overall, the comments were quite positive. There were a total of 20-30 issues, so the reply letter was 36 pages long.)
2022.05.19 - Submitted (Delayed due to the Shanghai pandemic)
2022.05.29 - In peer review (I guess some reviewers initially didn't accept the review, hence the slow progress in status)
2022.06.10 - Awaiting decision (Received reviewer comments)
2022.06.12 - Accepted

(0) 讚！ | 我是谁aa

After you returned your first review comments, the editor sent your reply back to the previous reviewer, right?

(0) 讚！ | 我是谁aa

How many days did the editorial review last? Has it been submitted for review?

(0) 讚！ | 江南浩荡

How many days have you been rejected?

(0) 讚！ | 明诚大叔

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission hit rate: 5.0
Research focus: Cancer 
Experience sharing: Can I ask everyone how successful it is to submit articles on cancer and non-coding RNA to this journal? I recently submitted to Molecular Cell, but tragically the editor wants to transfer it to Cell Reports, but my boss won't allow it and wants me to try again with NC and NAR

(0) 讚！ | 小瀚漠吖

Submitted at the end of July 2022, the manuscript was sent for review one week later. After another week, we received the comments for major revisions from two reviewers, which included approximately 10 important suggestions. The revision period was set for 6 months, and the revised manuscript was returned in early December. After one more month, some minor issues were raised, which were clarified and resubmitted. Finally, at the end of January, the article was accepted.

(16) 讚！ | banli