The directions related to my research are as follows: 1. Structural mechanics; 2. Behaviour and application of advanced materials; 3. Strain localization and other effects of nonlinearity. Although it is far inferior to JMPS and IJSS in the field of solid mechanics, and some articles have obvious flaws, it is actually a good journal. The IF has risen, and the editor-in-chief has become more and more strict. I hope that the journal will become better and better.

(81) Thank | 王兴仁

2018 (575), 2005 (107), 1992 (47), 2017 (515), 2004 (103), 1991 (49), 2016 (343), 2003 (110), 1990 (50), 2015 (292), 2002 (143), 1989 (38), 2014 (277), 2001 (161), 1988 (46), 2013 (227), 2000 (135), 1987 (37), 2012 (162), 1999 (46), 1986 (41), 2011 (108), 1998 (66), 1985 (54), 2010 (173), 1997 (53), 1984 (47), 2009 (86), 1996 (46), 1983 (63), 2008 (151), 1995 (45), 1982 (37)

(2) Thank | 1421653134@qq.com

2006 (134), 1993 (43), 2018 (575), 2005 (107), 1992 (47), 2017 (515), 2004 (103), 1991 (49), 2016 (343), 2003 (110), 1990 (50), 2015 (292), 2002 (143), 1989 (38), 2014 (277), 2001 (161), 1988 (46), 2013 (227), 2000 (135), 1987 (37), 2012 (162), 1999 (46), 1986 (41), 2011 (108), 1998 (66), 1985 (54), 2010 (173), 1997 (53), 1984 (47), 2009 (86), 1996 (46), 1983 (63), 2008 (151), 1995 (45), 1982 (37)

(3) Thank | 1421653134@qq.com

Only one reviewer. Very detailed review and comments.

(12) Thank | zj

On April 16, 2025, the submission was rejected due to the file exceeding 5MB;
On April 18, 2025, resubmitted after modifications;
On May 20, 2025, major revisions were made;
On May 30, 2025, revisions requested;
On June 8, 2025, minor revisions were made;
On June 20, 2025, accepted for publication;
In the field of biomechanics, submitted to IJMS for the second time. The first submission may have been rejected directly due to lack of innovation. This time, the reviewers acknowledged the research's innovation and provided mostly positive feedback. Their suggestions were professional, offering many optimizations and modifications for the model. The editorial process was quick, with strict formatting requirements. It is advised to carefully address the editor's suggestions.

(0) Thank | liu.~

No, today is the 11th day already. I did the math, and if there was a fifth reviewer, he/she would also be overdue for review.

(0) Thank | taylor1993

Has the result come out? It has been several days since RRC, and only two reviewers have accepted the review.

(0) Thank | 大大大大tree

Similarly, RRC arrived quickly, and the deadline was extended twice. It is expected that four reviewers have completed their reviews. RRC 6.9 has been in the RRC status for 10 days and has not changed yet.

(1) Thank | taylor1993

The impact factor has increased so much? What's going on?

(0) Thank | Lagfange

Finally been hired. The first reviewer gave excellent feedback, and I spent a month revising it myself to avoid any problems. The paper was accepted within a week after major revisions, and both the reviewers and editors worked very quickly. The process of submitting papers is going very smoothly at the moment, and I feel fortunate to be so lucky.

(1) Thank | CivilChen

May I ask if you have received the results? It has been 8 days since the reviewers replied to my comments, and I am feeling anxious.

(0) Thank | 溺水的小鱼

Ah, finally got hired!!!!

(1) Thank | Chang

Hello, may I ask if you have been pointed out by the editor about some issues in the picture? If so, how did you make the modifications?

(0) Thank | 冰封世界

Help! How should I modify and respond to the editor's suggestions? Last time, he mentioned these suggestions and I have already replied and made changes, but it seems that he is not satisfied and is asking me to revise them again. I would like to ask the experts, what is the approach to modifying these issues?

(1) Thank | 冰封世界

So what happened next? Did it undergo major revisions? Are the comments from the reviewers okay, or was it rejected?

(0) Thank | cimon

Submitted in late January 2025, reviewed shortly after, with the first review taking about a month to complete. After revisions were made, another month was given for resubmission. Following more than a month of revisions, a second review was conducted and results were released within a week. However, one reviewer had two corrections that needed to be addressed, so another round of revisions was required, lasting about half a month. By the end of May, the revised manuscript was resubmitted for a third review, which was completed the week before last. However, the editor WQ has yet to process it. Anxiously waiting ??...

(2) Thank | Chang

Bro, do you have any news now?

(0) Thank | 蒜鸟蒜鸟

Can anyone help me with this, please?

(0) Thank | 蒜鸟蒜鸟

Is my revision response exactly the same as your first twelve comments? Have you made any changes? Have you resubmitted it?

(0) Thank | LY_Remember

Dear experts, please spread the word.

(0) Thank | 蒜鸟蒜鸟

May I ask how long the second review gives reviewers to review the manuscript, starting from the acceptance of the review invitation?

(0) Thank | 蒜鸟蒜鸟

The process was tough, but the outcome was joyful; this submission brought a lot of rewards.

(0) Thank | 奔跑的小旺子

Submission on November 5, 2024
Rejection on November 6, 2024 (Editor provided more than ten suggestions for revisions)
Significant revisions based on editor's suggestions, took some time to make changes, spent one month revising the paper
Resubmission on February 17, 2025 (Editor sent for review)
Revisions on April 23, 2025 (Major revisions, very professional feedback)
Revised on May 20, 2025
Accepted on June 8, 2025
The process took 7 months.

(0) Thank | 奔跑的小旺子

May I ask what website to use to find the specific number of reviewers?

(0) Thank | wuyangjun2021

The first review comments came back more than 11 days ago, and there have been 2+ revisions since then. The status is still "Required Reviews Completed," it's so slow now. The previous submission also took 9 days to be reviewed.

(0) Thank | 头发保住