Four months for first review. This journal is really slow. At first I even wanted to withdraw the manuscript.

(3) Thank | 宝宝

The fact is that since he went open source, the quality of his articles and impact factor have been declining year by year. Now, a work of similar quality submitted to Communications Biology will be much more recognized than this journal.

(0) Thank | 彬冰

However, HBM refers to section 8.3, so do not just focus on the IF clause.

(0) Thank | 慕白ss

There is no essential connection with OA. OA transformation is currently an international trend, with the impact factor of most journals declining this year.

(0) Thank | 慕白ss

Since becoming an OA journal, HBM has gradually degraded from a top-tier publication to a lesser one. The impact factor has been dropping year by year, and the quality of articles is determined by how much money is paid

(0) Thank | 彬冰

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 75.0 
Emphasized research direction: fMRI; Sharing of neural imaging experiences: Old journals with a focus on methodology and innovation points, submitted in November, major revisions given in early December, reviewers provided many statistical suggestions, resubmitted in January, accepted in early February

(0) Thank | 长安光启

Submission Experience:
initial submission: 2023.06.11
decision: major revision: 2023.08.08
resubmission: 2023.09.30
final decision: accept on 2023.11.02

(0) Thank | Hong li

Review speed: 2.0 | Submission hit rate: 50.0 Emphasized research direction: fMRI; Experience sharing of schizophrenia: Submitted on July 11, received review comments on August 16. The comments were quite positive, but it was rejected. Reversible Reject

(0) Thank | 西域鸿吉

Review speed: 12.0 | Submission success rate: 5.0
Emphasized research direction: Neurosystem
Experience sharing: After two rounds of revisions, there were no review comments, but they asked me to revise and gave me a month deadline for revision. What does this mean, let's discuss it

(0) Thank | 芙蓉遐思

Write a Delay Letter to the Editor

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

The time for major revision of SCI papers, due to the need for additional experiments, typically lasts no less than two weeks and cannot exceed the set limit of 90 days. Minor revisions can be completed within 10-20 days. The deadline can be adjusted based on individual circumstances

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

How to apply for an extension?

(0) Thank | 陶宜三岁啦

When is the deadline for my submission? Can the deadline be changed or is it the actual deadline required by the journal?

(0) Thank | 上清雨真

The text is already in English.

(9) Thank | Nightsoul

Staying here, but it is not easy to move forward from this stage. With a score of over 4, it is considered satisfactory

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

Review Speed: 6.0 | Submission Hit Rate: 25.0
Experience Sharing: I just received a paper, submitted in early March 2015, feedback on the review was sent back in June, requesting major revisions. I was busy graduating with my PhD and looking for a job, so I didn't have time to make the revisions. I was given six months to make the revisions, but due to starting a new job, I still didn't have time. As the deadline in December approached, and my work situation stabilized, I wrote a letter to the editor requesting a one-month extension until January 2016, explaining that I had been busy job hunting and had a lot of changes to make to the article. The editor readily agreed. I used the New Year holidays to work overnight for a week, and finally completed the revisions. The revised version was sent back on January 20th, and on March 15th, I received a letter saying it was accepted. Overall, it's important to highlight the innovative points of the article and its potential help for clinical and other research in order to catch the editor's interest

(0) Thank | 华清静丹

Review speed: 6.0 | Submission hit rate: 25.0
Experience sharing: Summarize a few characteristics for reference only. 
1. The processing speed is relatively slow. Including several aspects: 
    - Slow review process, slow submission to the editorial department, the reviewer's review speed is acceptable; but it is incomprehensible that the editorial department changes reviewers frequently. If the reviewer fails to respond promptly (including accepting the review invitation, submitting the review, etc.), they will be quickly replaced without even sending a reminder email. This results in multiple rounds of re-review of the manuscript, as each new reviewer increases the chances of the article being majorly revised or rejected, and significantly prolongs the entire review cycle. It took me over 17 months from the initial submission to final acceptance (including major revisions, rejection and resubmission, further major revisions, minor revisions, and multiple later reminders). 
    - Slow initial version, it took more than half a year from acceptance to online with pagination, but the speed has recently increased. 
2. The impact factor fluctuates slightly. Compared to Neuroimage which shows relatively stable performance, its impact factor often drops from nearly 7 to slightly above 5, rebounding in the second year; but generally stays between 5.0-7.0. 
3. Articles on clinical disease imaging research have a broader acceptance compared to NI

(0) Thank | 削月野雪

Review speed: 4.0 Experience sharing: The first review took four months, and it wasn't until the third month that a reviewer was found. The feedback in the fourth month required major revisions. The revised manuscript was accepted directly after three more months of review. This journal is really slow. At one point, I even considered withdrawing the manuscript

(0) Thank | 虹雨mm

A very disgusting magazine, after being reviewed for two months, was returned with no feedback on the manuscript!

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁