Referee reports, whether signed or not, are subsequently shared with the other reviewers. We support our reviewers signing their reports to authors if reviewers feel comfortable doing so. By policy, referees are not identified to the authors, except when they sign their reports to the authors. Authors may also suggest referees these suggestions are often helpful, although they are not always followed. Excluded scientists must be identified by name. At the submission stage authors may indicate a limited number of scientists who should not review the paper. The corresponding author is notified by e-mail when the editor decides to send a paper for review. More details are available on the manuscript transfer service. In the event of publication, the received date is the date of submission to Nature Communications. In cases where the work was felt to be of high quality, papers can sometimes be accepted without further review, but if there were serious criticisms, the editors will consider them in making the decision. ![]() If the authors ask the editors to consider the previous reviews, they should include a note explaining the relationship between the submitted manuscript and the previous submission and (assuming it has been revised in light of the referees' criticisms) give a point-by-point response to the referees. However, this decision must be made at the time of initial submission and cannot be changed later. Alternatively, authors may choose to request a fresh review, in which case they should not use the automated transfer link, and the editors will evaluate the paper without reference to the previous review process. In that case, the journal editors will take the previous reviews into account when making their decision, although in some cases the editors may choose to take advice from additional referees. If a paper was previously reviewed at another Nature journal, the authors can use an automated manuscript transfer service to transfer the referees' reports to Nature Communications via a link sent by the editor who handled the manuscript. Preprint archives do not compromise novelty. Papers that are published independently while your manuscript is under review or under revision at Nature Communications are also not considered to compromise novelty, even in cases where there is conceptual overlap. The novelty of a submitted paper is considered to be compromised if it has significant conceptual overlap with a published paper or one accepted for publication by Nature Communications. Manuscripts that meet these editorial criteria are sent out to external referees for further assessment. Copies of any papers containing related work that are under consideration or in-press at other journals should be included with the submission as additional supplementary information.Įach new submission is assigned to a primary editor, who reads the paper, consults with the other editors, and then evaluates the novelty and potential impact of the work, the appropriateness for the journal's editorial scope, the conceptual or methodological advances described in the paper, and its potential interest to Nature Communications' readership. ![]() The corresponding author should indicate whether the work described in the manuscript has been discussed with a specific Nature Communications editor before submission. Manuscripts should be submitted via the online submission system.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |