I submitted an article, and the speed of reviewing is still relatively fast. The initial review is 3 months and the revision time is 6 months.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

Does "editor assigned" mean that the initial review by the editor has passed?

(0) Thank | 稻妻利娇

You can choose a non-OA option, which does not incur any fees

(0) Thank | Quentin Broad

Submission on February 7, 2022
Editor invited on February 22
Editor assigned on February 23
Reviewers assigned on February 17
Under review on March 8
Editor assigned on May 3
Reviewers assigned on August 30
Under review on September 1
Revised on November 14
Returned on December 26 (Revision 1)
Minor revision on January 23, 2023, Revised on February 28 (Revision 2)
Editor assigned on March 7
Returned for more revisions on March 25, Submitted on April 21 (Revision 3)
Editor assigned on April 24
Fourth round of revisions on June 18, Submitted on July 9 (Revision 4)
Accepted on July 12

Summary: Submitted on February 7, 2022, accepted on July 12, 2023. Under review after 7 months of submission. There were a couple of reminders in between, which made the waiting quite agonizing. However, the journal seemed promising, so I kept waiting. The delay might be due to the low publication rate compared to the number of submissions and having both OA and non-OA options. During the revision stage, the reviewers were strict and professional, with a deep understanding of the research content. They even found references from the 90s, mostly related to statistical principles. The first two revisions were major, while the third and fourth were minor, with around 80% changes made in the manuscript. Besides some demographic data, all data were reanalyzed, and many sections were added and modified. The submission and revision process was painful, and I sought advice from statistical experts. Fortunately, the outcome was satisfactory

(0) Thank | Quentin Broad

Review speed: 2.0 | Submission hit rate: 25.0
Emphasized research directions: dyslipidemia; elderly people; quality of life related to health
Experience sharing: Submitted on February 7, 2022, invited by Editor on February 22, editor assigned on February 23, reviewers assigned on February 17, under review on March 8, editor assigned on May 3, reviewers assigned on August 30, under review on September 1, revise on November 14, returned for revision on December 26. Minor revisions on January 23, 2023, revised on February 28, editor assigned on March 7, reviewer's comments received again on March 25, submitted on April 21 (revision 3), editor assigned on April 24, minor revisions on June 18, submitted final revisions on July 9 (revision 4), accepted on July 12. In summary, submitted on February 7, 2022, accepted on July 12, 2023, under review for 7 months, during which I followed up two or three times. It was a bit agonizing to wait, but I felt that this journal was good, so I kept waiting. During one of the follow-ups, the editor asked if I would like to continue to wait for the review, with a potential rejection, or withdraw the submission. I chose to wait. I speculate that the reason for the slow process may be that this journal publishes relatively few articles each year, but receives many submissions. It also offers both OA and non-OA options, so the processing may not be very prompt. During the revision stage, the reviewers were very strict and professional in reviewing the manuscript, showing a good understanding of my research content, as if they were experts in the field. They even found references from the 1990s, related to statistical principles. The first two rounds of revisions were major revisions, while the third and fourth rounds were minor revisions, with approximately 80% of the article being revised. Apart from basic demographic data, all the data were reanalyzed, and many parts were added and modified. The process of submission and revision was painful, and I consulted many statistics teachers. Finally, I managed to complete the article after multiple revisions. Luckily, the outcome was not bad

(1) Thank | Quentin Broad

It's been a while for me too. I won't rush after seeing your comment either

(0) Thank | 大力从柳

How long has the editor been assigned?

(0) Thank | 大力从柳

It is not easy to express.

(0) Thank | taoran

Ah, I don't know if I should send the email. So annoying

(0) Thank | 是胜涛吖

I'm still in the same situation now, it's been a month, and I don't dare to rush

(0) Thank | 是胜涛吖

My editor assigned status lasted for a month, and then I emailed the editor to ask, and he rejected me directly on the same day

(0) Thank | 万剑曼寒

How long does it take for the "editor assigned" status to change? The official website says the average first decision takes 12 days, but it's been 14 days for me and it's still on "editor assigned" status. I'm getting a little anxious

(1) Thank | 是胜涛吖

Scale-related, rejected in the evening.
It is very strange that this journal has many scales, but still rejected.

(0) Thank | 你管我

Please do not waste public resources

(0) Thank | 万花语儿

Don't waste public resources when asking questions

(0) Thank | 万花语儿

Did you mean the first review that was not sent to the external reviewer, but was reviewed by the editor?

(0) Thank | 通幽星鹏

Concise and Clear Titles Reflecting the Core Content

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Life is like a camera, focus on what's important, capture the good times, develop from the negatives, and if things don't work out, take another shot

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

What kind of titles do reviewers generally prefer?

(0) Thank | 修然小公主

What kind of topic can catch the eye of reviewers?

(0) Thank | 破戒阳平

Rejected after a week of submitting, feeling upset, and ready to revise and submit to another magazine

(0) Thank | Dean Tony

Although there are no major changes this year, we'll see what happens in the future

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

Review speed: 3.0 | Submission hit rate: 50.0
Experience sharing: I got a paper published this year, which went through 4 revisions and 3 language polishing. The first review took about 3 months, while the rest were mostly completed within 1 month. No page fees are required. The journal has high requirements for statistical methods and language, but fortunately I encountered a diligent reviewer who not only pointed out the problems but also provided suggestions for revisions. Overall, it is a very good journal

(1) Thank | 上清湘云

Review speed: 3.0 Experience sharing: The first review took two months and 7 days, providing major revisions. There was a six-week revision period in between, with two rounds of under review

(0) Thank | 通幽寻菡

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission success rate: 75.0
Experience sharing: Submitted an article, the review speed was relatively fast, with the initial review taking 3 months and the revision time taking six months

(0) Thank | 巴蜀景同