7.4 submitted; 8.25 major revision; 9.19 minor revision; 9.24 accepted. Two reviewers, with a lot of questions, and the editorial office pointed out some language problems, but the overall feeling is very friendly. This is one of the official journals of the American Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists. I hope IF will be stable.

(0) Thank | Regulus

Pharmaceutical direction, nano micelles. I thought the article lack of innovation, but more comprehensive. The comments of the four reviewers were quite positive. There were four reviewers in the first review. For three reviewers nothing was serious. Reviewer 4 has more questions. I answered the questions one by one, revised the manuscript, and supplemented several small experiments. I submitted the revised version in 10 days. The editor of the second review made a few comments, focusing on the language, and the two reviewers had no comments. I asked foreign friends for help. It took 17 days to revise the language, and it was accepted the next day after revision submitted. It took three months in total, of which I revised for almost a month, and the efficiency was ok. To summarize: it lasted three months in total. The reviewers were relatively friendly, the questions were not difficult to answer, the editors were friendly and the editorial office was quite efficient. The main time is spent on the review, and the second review took a long time. 6.28 submitted, 6.28 Editor Assigned, 7.11 Under Review, 8.4 Major Revision, 8.15 Submitted Revised Manuscript, 8.15 Under Review, 9.11 Minor Revision, 9.28 Submitted Revised Manuscript, 9.29 Accepted.

(0) Thank | 子非鱼

The IF seems to be going up. Each reviewer's comments are detailed and friendly. The reviewers agree with some of the methods in the article, and also suggest other ways to do the same work; good experience thus far overall.

(2) Thank | Anonymous

We need to write what the editor proposed at the time

(0) Thank | 终幕冬菱

Can you provide information on pharmacology and pharmacokinetics?

(0) Thank | 中原思琳

Every study is inevitably limited by its research limitations. Research design and methods can all contribute to these limitations

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

It is still necessary for us to clearly explain the limitations of the research in the paper, and to indicate how these limitations affect the conclusions of the paper, so that reviewers and other readers can understand that we have fully considered the limitations of the study. Addressing the limitations of the study in the discussion section typically increases the credibility of the article. Thinking about how to overcome these limitations in future research can have a positive impact

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Do we need to mention the limitations of the article in the discussion?

(0) Thank | 修然小公主

What are the limitations of the article?

(0) Thank | Oswald Edie

Continuing from above, the submitted content is related to pharmacokinetics. I personally do not consider it to be novel, but there is a substantial amount of content. Both reviewers asked good questions, some of which were indeed difficult to answer. When revising, I maintained a sincere attitude and did not provide any unconvincing answers.

(0) Thank | 自由鲜奶

6.28 submitted
7.15 under review
8.09 major revision
9.05 revision submitted
9.10 under review
10.08 minor revision
10.09 revision submitted
10.15 accept

(3) Thank | 自由鲜奶

Is this magazine subscription-based?
I had an article published this year, and I was so happy to receive a DOI number right away after acceptance. Minor revisions seemed pretty easy

(0) Thank | 重阳仕超

7.4 submitted
8.25 major revision
9.19 minor revision
9.24 accepted
Received two reviewers' comments, with some questions and language issues pointed out by the editor. Overall, the feedback was friendly. One of the official journals of the American Pharmaceutical Scientist Association, hoping for stability

(0) Thank | 般若北晶

Pharmaceutical direction, nano micelles. The article lacks innovation in self-feeling, but it is relatively comprehensive. The opinions of the four reviewers are mostly positive. The first review had four reviewers, three with no major issues, and reviewer4 had more issues, which were addressed one by one and modified. Some small experiments were added, and it was resubmitted 10 days later. The second review editor offered a few suggestions, focusing on language, with no major comments from the two reviewers. A friend from abroad helped with the language. It took 17 days to revise the language, and it was accepted the next day after resubmission. The whole process took three months, with about a month spent on revisions. The efficiency was acceptable. In summary, it took three months in total. The reviewers were friendly and the questions they raised were not difficult, the editors were friendly, and the efficiency of the editorial department was relatively high, with most of the time spent on the reviews, especially the second review process. 
6.28 submitted
6.28 editor assigned
7.11 under review
8.4 major revision
8.15 submitted revised manuscript
8.15 under review
9.11 minor revision
9.28 submitted revised manuscript
9.29 accepted

(0) Thank | 罗敷小公主

3 points margin, hoping to maintain stability, a slight increase would also be nice

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

is very fast and will be solved in forty days.

(1) Thank | Anonymous

The speed was very fast, and it was solved in just forty days

(0) Thank | 珉林水芸

Review Speed: 1.0 | Submission Acceptance Rate: 75.0
Experience Sharing: I got one accepted this year, and the best part is that I was given a DOI number immediately after acceptance. Minor revisions, seemed quite easy

(0) Thank | 降龙亮亮

Just received a paper, and the chief editor accepted it directly after major revisions! The chief editor, editors, and experts all seem very serious and knowledgeable, raising many questions for discussion together. It is a great journal in the field of pharmacy!

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

I once submitted an article to this magazine not long ago (actually, "not long" was only about a year ago). About 2 months later, two reviewers had conflicting opinions, and the editor did not seek arbitration, but asked me to make major revisions. So I made major revisions and resubmitted the article (1 month later). 3 months later, I emailed to inquire about the decision. The editor said to please be patient and give them some time. Another month passed, and the rejection letter contained criticisms from the reviewer and the editor's nonsense like "I also think the quality of the article is average, but we would be very happy to see you try again next time!" I'm done, these guys have confused me! I'm not playing with them anymore!

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

It is a pretty good journal in the field of pharmacy, I don't know why it belongs to the 4th quartile

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

Review Speed: 6.0 | Submission Acceptance Rate: 25.0
Experience Sharing: It's quite difficult to get published in this journal! I agree with the comment above

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

Review speed: 6.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 25.0
Experience sharing: Innovative research methods are appreciated, but the submission process is relatively long

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

Review speed: 6.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 25.0
Sharing experience: Journal papers have very high inclusion requirements, the content must be novel, the workload is large, and the requirements for writing papers are also quite high. It can definitely be considered a top pharmaceutical journal

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

Feed that the efficiency is a bit slow, from submission to acceptance for 5 months~

(0) Thank | Anonymous