Publication in this journal is relatively easy. The content of the research often published in this journal is satisfactory – not groundbreaking. My best advice is to follow the journal guidelines and you’ll be all set. The peer reviewers are serious and responsible. In general, this journal is considered to be an old-fashioned journal on antiviral drugs. The impact factor is not high, but OK.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

Calculate the mean by using Average(), standard deviation by using STDEV.S(), and standard error by using STDEV.S()/COUNT()^0.5

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

The method of relative quantification in qPCR is the ΔΔCT method, which first calibrates with a reference gene and then calculates the difference between the sample and the control group

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

How to handle the results of qPCR?

(0) Thank | 修然小公主

How to calculate the margin of error?

(0) Thank | 上清雨真

Stagnating and not progressing, but being at this critical point, it will be difficult to push further up. With a score of over 4 points, it can be considered satisfactory

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

Review Speed: 1.0 | Submission Acceptance Rate: 50.0
Experience sharing: The reviewers are very professional, asking insightful questions and requiring good experimental designs. We have had two papers accepted in our lab, one on antiviral drugs, with one in vivo and one in vitro study. It took 2-3 months from submission to online publication

(0) Thank | 梅花友珊

My article was written by myself and it was reviewed for more than two months.Two reviewers refused to review and then changed.I feel that this journal is generally about a month.The results were still very smooth, Minor revision and modification. Received a week later, online soon.The main thing I feel is that it has been hot recently, so it is beyond imagination.There is a review to overhaul, the experiment of direct reply can not do, huh, huh.

(1) Thank | RUI

Review Speed: 2.0 Experience Sharing: I wrote my own article and it took over two months for review. Two reviewers refused to review the article and it had to be reassigned. The journal usually takes about a month for review. However, the process went smoothly in the end, with minor revisions and modifications. The article was accepted a week later and the online publication was fast. Overall, it was a surprisingly smooth process, possibly due to the current popularity of the topic. There was one review that required major revisions, but I replied that the experiment could not be done, haha

(1) Thank | 上清新霞

Review Speed: 1.0 Experience Sharing: Submitted on February 7th, rejected on March 3rd with the reason being that there were too many submissions to go through, so they decided not to accept it. I am also frustrated

(1) Thank | 京城经略

In the first review, major revisions in May, second review in January, final acceptance. Online for 2 days, proofreading for 3 days, publishing in 10 days, I think the efficiency is very high!

(0) Thank | 水月莘莘

The journal is of a high level, the review is very strict, and the content of the article needs certain innovation.The requirements for English are also high, and it is generally necessary to modify the language.

(1) Thank | 123wer

Review Speed: 2.0
Experience Sharing: The journal has a high level, strict reviewing process, and requires articles to be innovative. High standards are also set for the English language, often requiring language revisions

(0) Thank | 碧桃逸致

Submitted in September 12th, after two major revisions, my article was still rejected by the editor-in-chief in February 13th. On the day I received the rejection letter, I felt extremely upset. After carefully reading the letter, I couldn't find any reasons for the rejection. After a few days of contemplation, I decided to write to inquire about the reasons for the rejection. About a week later, the editor-in-chief replied that it was due to lack of innovation in my article. I felt dissatisfied because the compound I researched had never been published in articles related to anti-HBV. So, I wrote back to argue! After a few more days, the editor-in-chief accepted my suggestions and advised me to resubmit. After resubmitting, the editor-in-chief consulted two very professional reviewers who raised dozens of very professional and difficult questions. After more than a month of revisions, I resubmitted. Unfortunately, after a month, the reviews came back, one reviewer suggested major revisions and the other suggested rejection. My goodness! Fortunately, the editor-in-chief was very kind and found a third reviewer for me! Following the suggestions of the first and third reviewers, I added four additional cell experiments. Today, on September 10th, my article was finally accepted after the fourth review! I am so happy on this Teacher's Day!

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

Hit two in a row, feels relatively easy, probably related to research direction

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission hit rate: 25.0
Experience sharing: The editor is good and quite friendly. However, the questions raised by the reviewers are quite difficult to answer and very professional!

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

The editor is very patient

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

I want to give it a try, got a result that's not bad, don't know what to do next, hoping experienced people can give me some advice!

(0) Thank | 长安诗岚

I want to try it out, do a fairly ok result, don't know how, experienced cattle know more!

(0) Thank | Anonymous

Hmm, do you think it will rise again next year?

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁

The reviewers are very responsible, even when discussing tragedies, they are compassionate and reasonable

(0) Thank | 凌霄高洁