My experience with this journal was terrible. I submitted my manuscript, they reviewed it in two months, and five reviewers provided comments. Unfortunately, my paper was rejected. However, the editor gave me hope when he said that after I completed the major revisions I could re-submit. After all the work? I submitted again, waited two months and then got rejected a second time.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission success rate: 50.0
Experience sharing: It was quite difficult, took 2 months and ended up being rejected in the end, quite miserable. Submitted on April 13, under review on April 17, under assessment on May 2, decision on May 8.

(0) Thank | Adelaide Lawson

The first review took three months, with two reviewers providing over a dozen comments each. One opinion was more promising, while the other was neutral. Unfortunately, the editor did not give the opportunity for further revisions and rejected it directly. It's quite tough...

(0) Thank | 秋春小仙女

Can we be co-corresponding authors for this journal?

(0) Thank | 蓬莱山欣嘉

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission hit rate: 5.0
Research focus: Multiple pregnancy sharing experiences: submitted on March 13, 2024, under review on March 16, under assessment on March 31, decision made on April 4. The focus is highly clinical, editors are particularly interested in issues that have not been addressed in guidelines or where existing evidence is disputed. The review process is indeed fast, but it also depends on the attitudes of the reviewers. Editors have significant decision-making power, and while all three reviewers found the manuscript interesting and well-written overall, it seems that one of them did not pay enough attention and raised some unimportant issues. The other two mainly focused on data analysis and language issues, which could have been resolved easily, but unfortunately the editor still rejected it

(0) Thank | 江南之云

That is the sheet for signing, there is a template on the official website

(0) Thank | 一只馨逸呀

Why are there so many dates under review?

(0) Thank | 凌霄洋泽

Did you finally accept?

(0) Thank | 凌霄洋泽

Research focus: Pelvic organ prolapse
Experience sharing: September 11 - Submitted 
September 12 - Being Processed 
September 13, September 24, October 13, October 26 - Under Review
November 2, November 14 - Under Assessment

(0) Thank | 般若又易

Hello, may I ask how is the progress going now? Is this "under review" for external review or internal review?

(0) Thank | 无击骊颖

10.20 Under Assessment

(0) Thank | 通幽盼松

How many reviewers are required to review this magazine before it can be completed?

(0) Thank | 坂田修齐

9.16 Submission; 9.20: Being Processed

(0) Thank | 通幽盼松

Research focus: Polycystic Ovary Syndrome
Experience sharing: Submitted on 8.21, under review since 8.23, entered under review on 9.7

(0) Thank | 坂田修齐

How long has your being processed been going on?

(0) Thank | 坂田修齐

Currently still being processed

(0) Thank | 琪帆小公主

Can anyone tell me if the statement of authorship is supposed to be on the official website or can we use our own template? I couldn't find this statement on the official website

(0) Thank | 西域俊健

Hey, me too... How long did it take for you to go under review in the end?

(0) Thank | 北风乐青

How long does it take for your manuscript to be processed and receive feedback?

(0) Thank | 逍遥如寒

Yes, I was being processed on the first day, and then on the second day it changed to under review

(0) Thank | 魔都艳蕙

Is the status of the submission "under review" after sending the magazine for external review? It has been in the "being processed" status for 2 weeks now

(0) Thank | 璃月元思

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission hit rate: 25.0
Research emphasis: Cervical cancer
Experience sharing: The editing and review speed are very fast. The submission was sent for external review on the second day, and the external review result came back in close to a month. After reading the opinions, I was almost spitting blood. As an old journal in the field of obstetrics and gynecology, the first reviewer had no idea about the progress in this field or the updated guidelines. They did not carefully read the manuscript and directly stated that the research had no clinical significance. However, almost none of the opinions in the review was correct. They even said the recommended treatment in the guidelines was "impractical." The second reviewer had two major comments and several minor ones. The first major comment was to analyze a topic that is still a huge debate in the field, which was completely beyond the scope of my article. If I analyze that, the article could be directly published in a Lancet sub-journal. The second major comment was trivial, simply discussing some limitations in the article. There have been numerous articles using the same analytical methods in the journal recently. Criticizing based on this point was unreasonable. Overall, I am quite disappointed in this journal

(0) Thank | 魔都艳蕙

It's too tragic

(0) Thank | 云碧少爷

Is the topic of the manuscript within the scope defined by the journal; the academic quality and impact factor of the journal, as well as the acceptance rate; the review and publication cycle of the journal; and the page charges

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Collect and list a wide range of candidate journals; Screen target journals; Decide on the target journal for submission

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德