My colleagues and I submitted an article on myocardial infarction electrocardiograms, which was unfortunately rejected in January. We had two reviewers, one of which was extremely interested in the research and another that was not interested at all. Sadly, the editor refused to accept our manuscript. Despite the rejection, we feel that the quality of the journal is quite high. The reviewers are very helpful and constructive, and raised several important questions. Based on our experience, the review speed is fast, and high-quality articles can be submitted.

(0) Thank | 24447465@qq.com

How are things going afterwards?

(0) Thank | 包包唯一

May I ask what happens next? I heard that this magazine has high quality standards.

(0) Thank | 包包唯一

May I ask what is the situation with Editor after 6 days?

(0) Thank | 飞月凝安

It has been 2 months since submission, and it is still with the editor.

(0) Thank | 通幽鑫哲

Review speed: 3.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 50.0 Experience sharing: 4.24 Submitted article on 5.26, received major revision comments, revised after 5 days, and received an email 3 days later requesting changes to the article format. Minor revision was requested on 6.27, revised on the same day, and status changed to "Revision submitted to journal" after 9 days, and then accepted. It seems that this journal has a relatively long format review time for revised submissions. Overall, the reviewers' comments were fair, the review speed was moderate, and given the context of the three major publishing houses' poor reputation, this high-volume journal is still a good alternative

(0) Thank | 岭南骊泓

Pretty fast. Usually two or three days

(0) Thank | 书易Sama

Hello, may I ask how long it will take for witheditor to submit for external review?

(0) Thank | 太山天震

My understanding is that the initial submission to AJC does not have any formatting requirements, but any revisions afterwards must follow the magazine's standard formatting template. This may be because the editor is asking you to make formatting adjustments

(0) Thank | 书易Sama

Thank you, it should be like this, their formatting review is in the process of modification, and the status just changed to "With editor"

(0) Thank | 岭南骊泓

Hello, I would like to inquire about the status of this journal. Have you had a similar experience? When I submitted the revised manuscript for the first time, I received an email from the editorial office stating that they had received the revised manuscript. However, the status in the system has been showing "revision submitted to journal" ever since. Three days after the revision, I received another email from the editorial office asking for some formatting changes as follows:

Your revised submission has been received by The American Journal of Cardiology. However, before we can proceed with the publishing process, we ask you to make the following changes to your submission:

After submitting the revision again, the status still shows "revision submitted to journal." I'm not sure if this means it has been accepted or not

(0) Thank | 岭南骊泓

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission hit rate: 25.0
Emphasized research directions: Queue; Biomarkers; Cardiovascular
Experience sharing: Submitted on 3.18; Received major revision comments on 4.10, both reviewers' questions were quite pertinent, revised and resubmitted to the editorial office 2 days later; Received minor revision comments on 5.08, reviewer 1 did not ask further questions, reviewer 2 raised some formatting-related questions; Became accepted in the system on 5.29. Between 5.08 and 5.29, it showed as "revision submitted to journal" for 15 days, later changed to "with editor," and finally became "accept."

(0) Thank | 书易Sama

Hello bro, how is the progress of your submission?

(0) Thank | 努力啊大孤云

Which magazine did you end up submitting to?

(0) Thank | 碧水彬炳

How long does it usually take to complete Required Reviews?

(0) Thank | 風見炳錦

Biased research direction: Cardiovascular experience sharing: Garbage journal, reviewers are not professional at all. The article I wrote about the MIMIC database was questioned by the reviewer, who asked why the inclusion criteria did not match the recruitment criteria, and also asked what qualifications were needed to access the database, as well as why data with less than 5% missing values were excluded, etc. All a series of stupid questions. Then they suspected that one of the indicators was falsified, and the paper got rejected

(0) Thank | Barlow Haywood

When describing your innovative points, it is important to focus on the deficiencies of past research to describe your solution ideas in a complete and clear manner. Innovation requires the use of introduction techniques to write more content that is beneficial to yourself. In order to highlight the innovation of this study, it is necessary to choose from numerous references places that can highlight the differences and characteristics of this study. For example: (1) time issues; (2) research methods issues; (3) research area issues; (4) uncertainty; (5) proposing your own hypotheses for verification

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Introduction includes all or some of the following five elements: introduction of the background of the research area, significance, current status (lack), purpose of the research, and a summary of the research content

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

How is the originality of the article reflected in the introduction?

(0) Thank | Oswald Edie

What content should be included in the introduction?

(0) Thank | Darlene Pepys

Does not reply, does it mean rejection?

(0) Thank | 巴蜀采冬

Does this magazine accept individual case reports?

(0) Thank | 凌霄丹兰

Have you accepted it?

(0) Thank | 詹妮弗奥尔丁顿

Does this magazine accept individual case reports?

(0) Thank | 八坂绮亦

2 days

(0) Thank | 血天天悦