For help, I haven't passed the technical review of my submission. Which ones are required for this journal? Mine contains manuscript, supporting information, and justification. Those who have submitted research articles to this journal please tell me.

(1) Thank | 小哲数学

The result returned for the first time in February was rejection and resubmission. At that time, it was caught up with the epidemic and there was no way to do experiments. It was only after returning to school in June when the review comments were responded. Two weeks later, a minor revision was required, and it got accepted another three weeks after the minor revisions was submitted. I was very lucky that it can be accepted. The article quality is not bad.

(5) Thank | ZHEN523

Editor Yu Huang of UCLA is very nice, and the editor in charge responded very quickly. Generally, preliminary results were given in three days and reviewers’ comments were basically given within one month. Very efficient. The requirements for the innovation and importance of the article are high. It has no worries about the impact factor as the editor in chief is Academician Tang. At present, the IF is close to JMCC first time. After IF exceeds 8, it will be benchmarked against authoritative journals such as JMCA Small CM and other various authoritative journals.

(10) Thank | zhangzhiwei

2025.2.28 Submitted
2025.3.27 Major Revision
2025.4.14 Accepted

(0) Thank | 掌门

10.23 submit
10.24 initial assessment
10.30 with editor
11.9 in peer review
11.15 with editor
11.26 in peer review
12.13 major revision
1.26 revise
1.27 with editor
1.27 in peer review
1.29 accept
Email sent after acceptance to inquire about choosing OA.

(0) Thank | angxiuqing

It seems like they don't charge without the cover.

(0) Thank | lx

How come the impact factor of this journal keeps increasing? It shouldn't be like this, I feel like the quality of this journal is even better than CEJ.

(0) Thank | 偷锌的碳酸钠

Master, do you charge for your services?

(0) Thank | 大树和小草

The paper submitted in August is currently under review. I didn't check if there were any publication charges at that time. Just heard from a colleague that there are charges. Can anyone who has experience with this clarify whether there are charges or not? I also noticed Green open access options. Can we apply for a fee waiver for that?

(0) Thank | 大树和小草

Does this journal require payment? Any experts know? Hope someone kind-hearted can answer.

(0) Thank | 波啊

The submission was made on May 4th, and one reviewer agreed. On the 15th, an opinion from one reviewer was received. After about ten days, by the end of May, it became three reviewers agreeing to review. On June 13th, the second reviewer's opinion was received, and on June 18th, it became four reviewers agreeing to review. At the same time, the opinion of the third reviewer was quickly received. Do we really need this many reviewers now?

(1) Thank | zifengtaxue

The delivery has been in initial segments for 5 days. I don't know when it will reach the editor

(0) Thank | accept大行

Already submitted
10.29 submitted
11.8 under review
11.17 minor Revision
12.4 submitted
12.14 accept

(0) Thank | 丢失的雨季

I don't know if Mater. Chem. Front. still has a chance to be in the 1st quartile

(0) Thank | **--**

Brother, can we work together?

(0) Thank | 喃喃学语

Return the revised manuscript in about a week after coming back to review the comments, hoping for continuous improvement!

(0) Thank | CocuLiu

Edited by Shu Seki, received feedback for revisions one month after submission. Made the requested revisions but was rejected. The editor requested a major revision and resubmission. Resubmitted after 7 days and was rejected after 24 days (two reviewers, one agreed to accept, the other pasted my conclusion and suggested further optimization of experimental results, and recommended submission to RSC advance). Feeling a bit disappointed but mostly speechless. Although I have submitted many times and have become accustomed to rejections, it is difficult to accept such a rejection reason without any feedback or explanation, especially when one reviewer provided substantial revision suggestions and agreed to accept the revised manuscript. Sigh, still not good enough, mediocrity is the original sin.

(1) Thank | 黑小威

It feels better to watch the editors. Some editors are still good. Everyone should actively contribute. The trend of IF is still good. Domestic journals will not be wrong in the future.

(0) Thank | wahwahwahwah

What kind of application do you work on? We can work on it together.

(0) Thank | CTGU-Ran

I am engaged in cellular biology and I am not good at material preparation and characterization. I would like to collaborate on publishing high-impact articles on biomaterials.

(1) Thank | 生物医用材料123

I submitted an article in June, but the editor did not process it for 20 days. On the 21st day, it was directly rejected by the editor, who was named Wang Dan. It seems like this person really doesn't handle submissions much, always dragging it out.
Now I submitted again, and it took one day for the initial review. Then it went to the editor's hands, and it has been a week with no news.
I have never seen an editor as slow as this. If they don't want it, they can just reject it. Please don't drag it along.

(0) Thank | ajkdajkld

After using SCI-HUB to download or receive, the journal will provide the boss with a download link to access the page numbers.

(0) Thank | ajkdajkld

We don't have it anyway, maybe only the Institute of Chemistry has it...

(0) Thank | qwlqwl1995

I have also experienced it. The manuscript was held by the editor for 3 months without being reviewed. After urging for submission, it was rejected after 3 days.

(0) Thank | 天伟

Too slow, submission for one week, or editing office.

(0) Thank | YUAN22