Submitted on March 30th, with editor for 35 days; May 5th, under review; May 20th, required review completed. Then we waited for half a month. It was estimated that the editor invited a new reviewer; June 5th, major revision required; July 3rd, revision submitted; July 12th, accepted; July 25th, online. It was the first time that I submitted to this journal. It took 3.5 months from submission to acceptance. Editor-in-chief Wang Hao said in the email notifying the acceptance, “JCOMB has obtained an ISI Impact Factor of 7.635. We are targeting to raise its impact factor to 10.”

(14) Thank | WGWG

received 9 August 2018; accepted 5 September 2018; received 12 August 2018; accepted 21 August 2018; received 12 August 2018; accepted 23 August 2018; received 12 august 2018; accepted 23 August 2018; received 12 August 2018; accepted 2 September 2018; received 12 August 2018; accepted 5 September 2018.

(2) Thank | dandandan

Sep 26, 2019 submitted to journal; Oct 16, 2019 major revision; Nov 1, 2019 revised to journal; Nov 23, 2019 major revision; Dec 12, 2019 revised to journal; Dec 31, 2019 with editor; Jan 8, 2020 rejected. Two reviewers, who were very professional, provided a lot of in-depth opinions, and corrected many details, which are very helpful to the improvement of the paper. For papers with less than 7,000 words, the reviewer's comments given exceeded 4 pages, which was close to 2,000 words. The comments were very tricky. They pointed out the core insufficiency of the paper at a glance. If it was revised according to the opinions, it was possible to be accepted by an IF 10 journal. Just gather myself and revise it.

(1) Thank | 肉屠夫

Received on 9 August 2018; Accepted on 5 September 2018; Received on 12 August 2018; Accepted on 21 August 2018; Received on 12 August 2018; Accepted on 23 August 2018; Received on 12 August 2018; Accepted on 23 August 2018; Received on 12 August 2018; Accepted on 2 September 2018; Received on 12 August 2018; Accepted on 5 September 2018.

(0) Thank | dandandan

Look at the data of this journal's annual article numbers through the web of science. The articles indexed in 2019 were only published till May 2019, and there’re 601 articles published within five months. It is estimated that the annual article volume could be more than 1,000. In 2009, only 91 articles were published in the year. After ten years, the amount of articles published has increased by 10 times!! Has the current level of technology increased by 10 times than before? 2019 (601), 2013 (692), 2007 (88), 2001 (68), 2018 (700), 2012 (420), 2006 (74), 2000 (64), 2017 (675), 2011 (249), 2005 (60), 1999 (62), 2016 (809), 2010 (80), 2004 (75), 1998 (63), 2015 (606), 2009 (91), 2003 (67), 1997 (54), 2014 (605), 2008 (123), 2002 (54), 1996 (38)

(1) Thank | 1421653134@qq.com

Let me share my submission experience. I submitted in the mid-July, The research content was relatively frontier, the quality of the paper was above the average of our group (The impact factor of journal was not high). It was with editor for more than two weeks. Inviting the reviewers took more than half a month, maybe the suitable reviewer could not be found for a long time. The first review was fast after accepting the review. It took nearly one and a half month; the status was hanged twice during the period. In the first time, it showed that the review had finished. But it changed to under review again in the system a few days later, and it showed that the review had finished in several days. Two review comments came back, two was better, one was awesome, and there were more than 20 comments. I have never seen so many comments before; the main problem is that to supplement the data and analysis, it was hard to deal with. I revised it back and forth for nearly two weeks. I resubmitted the revision, the second revision was fast, and it was accepted within a month. It was with editor for less than half a month. I am looking forward to it. The speed is okay.

(0) Thank | 老汉推车越推越强

I thought I was going to have a good experience with this journal but there were many ups and downs throughout the entire process. Anything from technical issues (figures not showing up in the proof, random hyperlinks in the text, etc.) to multiple rounds of revisions. This is an OK journal but prepare yourself for quite the back and forth between the editor and reviewers.

(1) Thank | Jianyibest

I have been waiting for 2 weeks, and none of the 5 reviewers have accepted it.

(0) Thank | 反派

Submitted: 2025.01.20
With editor: 2022.01.20
Under review: 2025.01.22
Major revision: 2025.03.10
Revised submission: 2025.03.29
Accept: 2025.03.29

The efficiency is very fast, thanks to Editor Uday Vaidya!

(0) Thank | Primary scholar：Mr.G

20250311 submit
20250311 with editor
20250315 under review
I have sent out four invitations ten days ago, but none have been accepted.

(0) Thank | GAIJIN

May I ask when will we have the results?

(0) Thank | AMNMMH

2025.03.19 submitted
03.20 decision in process
03.22 reject
The editorial department said that the acceptance rate is currently less than 10%.

(0) Thank | Southern penguin

2025.3.9 with editor
2025.3.16 under review (8 reviewers)

(0) Thank | YH@0103

Boss, boss, I would like to ask how long it took from submission to review, and then how long it took to receive feedback.

(0) Thank | 肖en-d

12 were sent, 8 were accepted, it has been a week since RRC, gradually 5 people have returned their opinions. Does this journal require all reviewers to return their opinions before making a decision?

(0) Thank | 流水岩碎拳

The submission timeline is as follows: the first round of results was returned by Editor-in-Chief Wang Hao, but by the second round, he had already left, resulting in a much slower processing speed. The article was submitted after being rejected by Angew and AFM.
24.10.15 submit
10.15/16 with editor
10.24 under review
11.11 three reviews completed
11.22 fourth reviewer added
11.27 required reviews completed
12.1 decision in process
12.4 major revision
Four reviewers raised about 20 questions, requiring additional experiments. The reviewers' comments were longer than the main text.
12.28 revision with editor
25.1.21 with editor
1.27 under review with 2 reviewers
2.16 under review with additional 2 reviewers
2.22 required reviews completed
2.23 decision in process
3.8 accepted.

(1) Thank | zaneparker

Directly inviting 12 people to submit contributions, within less than two days, 8 people have already agreed. It's too overwhelming.

(0) Thank | wrxwrx

Do all authors need to click on the confirmation link after submitting the manuscript?

(0) Thank | zhoushangyan

It won't have any impact, my situation is the same as yours, received it yesterday, handled by editor Uday.

(0) Thank | zhongzhong是只小猫

Please translate the following paragraph into English: 

"Looking at the journal homepage, Wang Hao is no longer serving as the editor-in-chief. The article revisions were handled by Editor Wang. The status now is 'decision in process.' Will this have any impact on the handling of the manuscript? Should we send an email to inquire about it?"

(0) Thank | LET IT BEE

Is there any follow-up? How long have you been waiting?

(0) Thank | lilian4139

May I ask what happened next?

(0) Thank | lilian4139

Excuse me, is JMST fast? Is there a timeline that I can refer to?

(0) Thank | lilian4139

Is there any follow-up?

(0) Thank | lilian4139

Is it useful to send a follow-up email? I've been waiting for over half a month with the editor, and I'm debating whether or not to send one.

(0) Thank | 不愿意透露姓名的草根科研者