health professionals are involved in research as researchers themselves and as supervisors to undergraduate and postgraduate students. Authors may have unrealistic expectations regarding journal ...submission and review processes. The study aimed to describe journal response types and times for manuscripts finalised for submission by the University of the Free State School of Medicine medical editor.
this descriptive cohort study with an analytical component included all manuscripts finalised for submission to accredited journals by the medical editor, 2014-2017. Excel spreadsheets capturing all stages of the manuscript process were used to confidentially note information regarding submission and subsequent journal responses.
ninety-five manuscripts were submitted to 72 peer-reviewed accredited journals. The total number of submissions was 163. Only 46 (48.4%) manuscripts were accepted by the first journals submitted to. Rejected submissions (n=82) had a median journal response time of 15.5 days (range 0-381 days), with a third being sent for review. Nine manuscripts were accepted with no revisions needed. Accepted submissions (n=72) had a median of one round of revision (range 0-4 rounds), and a median time of 119.5 days (range 0-674 days) from submission to final acceptance.
within our setting, half of first submissions were unsuccessful, but rejection usually occurred rapidly. Acceptance for publication occurred at a median time of 4 months after one round of revision. If health professionals were made aware of expected outcomes and response times, it may prevent authors from falling victim to the publication practices of predatory journals.
Background: For authors, manuscript submission can seem fraught with obstacles. The present authors describe their experience with South African Family Practice (SAFP) regarding response types and ...times, compared with other SA-based journals.
Methods: This cohort study included information regarding communication with/from journals of manuscripts finalised for submission by the Free State University, School of Medicine medical editor, 2014-2017.
Results: Twenty-six submissions were made to SAFP; 78 to other SA-based journals. The most frequent first response from SAFP was "revisions required" (62%) and "rejected" (49%) from other SA-based journals. Median final response of rejected submissions was approximately a month at SAFP and approximately two weeks at other SA-based journals. Median final response of accepted submissions was approximately three months at SAFP and approximately four months at other SA-based journals.
Conclusion: This study provides data regarding expected outcomes and response times, which may prevent authors falling prey to email solicitations from predatory journals.
To the Editor: Our most recent submission to the SAMJ received the following email response:‘The editors advisory group has reviewed the submission of Manuscripts finalised for journal submission by ...the University of the Free State School of Medicine medical editor: Journal response types and times italics added and has concluded that it is not suitable for the general readership of the South African Medical Journal. In view of this we regret that we are unable to accept it for publication. You might also consider submitting this manuscript to another, more suitable journal.Thank you again for considering the South African Medical Journal for your work.’The Editor replies: I thank the authors of this letter for raising their concerns in a courteous way and with supplementary data. Their concerns are noted.
PDF
