Research Creative   My Account   Submit My Manuscript
Letpub, Scientific Editing Services, Manuscript Editing Service

Browse Journals by Title


Journal name:   ISSN:   Subject area:   IF range: -
Index:   Category:   Open Access:   Sort by:
Journal Cover Design
APA has partnered with LetPub to provide a full suite of author services

[Scientific Reports]Hello, you are Visitor Number 4553213 on this page.

Journal Profile
Journal TitleScientific Reports
Journal Title AbbreviationsSCI REP-UK
ISSN2045-2322
h-index149
CiteScore
CiteScoreSJRSNIPCiteScore Rank
6.700.8741.213
Subject fieldQuartilesRankPercentile
Category: Multidisciplinary
Subcategory: Multidisciplinary
Q122 / 200

Self-Citation Ratio (2020-2021)4.80%
期刊简介Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.
Official Websitehttps://www.nature.com/srep
Online Manuscript Submissionhttps://author-welcome.nature.com/41598
Open AccessYes
PublisherThe Macmillan Building, 4 Crinan Street, London N1 9XW Tel: +44 20 7014 6879; Email: scientificreports@nature.com
Subject AreaNatural Science Disciplines
Country/Area of PublicationEngland
Publication FrequencyContinuously updated
Year Publication Started2011
Annual Article Volume31052
Gold OA文章占比
OA期刊相关信息
WOS期刊SCI分区
Indexing (SCI or SCIE)Science Citation Index
Science Citation Index Expanded
Link to PubMed Central (PMC)https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog?term=2045-2322%5BISSN%5D
Average Duration of Peer Review *Authorized Data from Publisher: Submission to first decision: 56 days; Submission to first post-review decision: 59 days; Submission to Accept: 133 days
Data from Authors: Very fast, 2-3 Month(s)
Competitiveness *Data from Authors:
Useful Links
Relevant Journals 【Scientific Reports】CiteScore Trend
Comments from Authors
*All review process metrics, such as acceptance rate and review speed, are limited to our user-submitted manuscripts. As such they may not reflect the journals' exact competitiveness or speed.
  • Journals in the Same Subject Area
  • CiteScore Trend


First    Previous    1    2    3    4    5    6    7    Next    Last  (To Page
/189)
  Reviews on Scientific Reports: Write a review
Author: °C007


Subject Area: Earth and Environmental Science
Duration of Peer Review: 4.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2020-11-13 11:50:02
It is absurd to regard it as unqualified! There are three reasons: 1. There are too many articles published in SR, for 40,000 articles per year (?) This is a comprehensive journal involving earth, science, mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, medicine, environment, humanities, engineering, technology, agriculture, forestry, management fields, etc. If each field has 9 directions, there will be about 100 professional fields. If 40,000 papers are spread in these fields, there will be only 400 papers in each field, which is equivalent to the annual circulation of an ordinary professional journal. Is it too much? Not at all! This is just a new model of displaying the knowledge and information cluster with the improvement of big data processing (retrieval) capabilities in the information technology era. You are only confused by the new things, and provide inappropriate information that curses people, which is annoying and pitiful. 2. Some valueless papers were published, which is not a reason to regard that a certain journal is unqualified. Is there any journal has no valueless papers? Some top journals also have some valueless papers, otherwise the Han SY incident would not happen, and the Nobel Prize would still be sent to the wrong person. Having a high rate of valueless papers is the reason why xx journal is an unqualified journal. But it is definitely not the same for SR. Just look at its impact factor of 4.1 (Q1), and you can't say that the rate of valueless papers is high. At least it is lower than other 75% journals. 3. That’s just sour grapes. This is the real reason. Anyone who can publish one article here will not despise it, otherwise why do you want to submit to SR, are you a fool?

(552) Thank | °C007

Author: Derek


Subject Area: Medicine
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Rejected


Write a review

Reviewed 2020-10-07 21:28:24
September 4, the review invitation was received; September 7, I found it was treated as a spam, so I resumed it and found that I was required to finish the review in 10 days, that was, I should return the review comments on September 14. I didn't receive any comments from the editor after rejection. However, I saw my name in the updated reviewer list today. The request for review is a manuscript from a top medical school in a foreign country (the name, institution and contact information of the first author were retained in the manuscript, and I felt it was somewhat non-compliant). The article is about the combination of machine learning and cancer screening. It is estimated that the editor had seen the article of mine in similar directions published on the internet, and found me. I was not contacted before. This article can be said to be completely non-innovative. Using the model in sklearn, running the program in the cancer database, and adjusting the parameters. There are a lot of similar articles. The workload cannot be said to be absent, but the whole is hard work, at least in the direction of machine learning, there is no contribution. If there is a revision, then the entire article should be restarted from the beginning, and it is no different from rejection. Therefore, it makes sense to say that this journal is valueless. However, it is not the kind of journal that can your articles accepted by paying. At least you can easily make your articles accepted by the journals in Q1 and Q2, then you can say this journal is valueless. The most incomprehensible thing was that the article was sent to me before confirming if I can be the reviewer. What if I leaked it? This was not very responsible.

(41) Thank | Derek

Author: Marvin


Subject Area: Geoscience
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2020-01-02 15:55:39
I personally think this is a very good journal, especially I can get the opportunity of guidance and continuous attention from experts! A total of four reviewers (One of them insisted on rejection without providing detailed comments, but with few sentences saying that it did not solve any problems and was not suitable for publication in any journal. The other three reviewers had very positive comments. However, the reviewers were very serious and gave a lot of suggestions for revisions), and all the reviewers are academic experts who have posted a large number of articles in top journal (Such as Nature, Science, NC, NG, Geology, ESR, EPSL, etc.). From submission to publication, it went through from first rejection, second major revision, and the third minor revision to acceptance. I have benefited a lot from this submission, and it will be a treasure of my life! The second manuscript has been submitted for more than a month. Currently the new submission system does not support tracking the specific process. I hope I can receive good news after the new year~ PS: You will know it is a good journal or not after you submitting it. And I don’t think it is necessary to argue too much. At least SR is a better option to be submitted to after the rejection by NC and NG. It’s not terrible being rejected by the top journal. Stick to it! The rest of your life is very long, and there is always a chance to be accepted once~

(37) Thank | Marvin

Author: 遥花姬


Subject Area: Agriculture Science
Duration of Peer Review: 4.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-05-18 11:38:22
It took more than 50 days to be assigned to the editor and I urged 2 times during the period. Is it possible to be rejected in this status now? Stage: Start Date, End Date, Approximate Duration. Decision Started 14th May 19; Manuscript assigned to peer-reviewer/s 14th May 19; Manuscript Assigned to Peer-Reviewer/s 30th April 19; Manuscript Assigned to Editor 24th April 19; Manuscript Assigned to Peer-Reviewer/s 23rd April 19; Manuscript Assigned to Editor 19th April 19; Manuscript Submitted 25th February 19; Quality Check Started 22nd February 19.

(8) Thank | 遥花姬

Author: xzw1995


Subject Area: Multidisciplinary
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-03-14 14:19:38
Let me add that this journal and PLOS ONE are being considered for blacklisting by the National Fund Committee. It comes from Nature’s official news: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-07025-5...that researchers cannot use grant money to pay their publication fees....The first list contains two of the world's largest journals PLOS ONE and Scientific Reports. Joerg Heber, Editor-in-Chief of PLOS ONE. You should think twice before considering submitting articles to this journal.

(41) Thank | xzw1995

Author: 章鱼丸子


Subject Area: Geoscience
Duration of Peer Review: 5.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2016-07-08 14:08:23
I feel the journal requires a certain quality of the paper. Because my paper was on a real novel idea, it was not easy to find a reviewer. There was only one reviewer and the comments were mostly about details or asking for clarification, so it was minor revision. Took me 2 days to resubmit to the editor, and the editor sent it to the reviewer (I feel this is unnecessary). Then the reviewer returned only one sentence saying that the author had completely revised the article in accordance with the comments. Then the paper was accepted. Because I had formatted the paper corrected, there was no need to change the format, and I didn’t get questions regarding the language. In fact, the reviewer said that the language was good. Decision Started 1 July 2016, Manuscript assigned to peer-reviewer/s 1 July 2016, Manuscript Assigned to Peer-Reviewer/s 9 June 2016, Manuscript Assigned to Editor 18 May 2016, Manuscript Assigned to Peer-Reviewer/s 30 March 2016, Manuscript Assigned to Peer-Reviewer/s 23 March 2016, Manuscript Submitted 30 January 2016.

(9) Thank | 章鱼丸子

Author: aa6438


Subject Area: 计算机科学
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-23 19:18:11
The first trial has been in repair for a month with no progress.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | aa6438

Author: shenxiu


Subject Area: Geoscience
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-21 16:08:47
You can send an email to remind them.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | shenxiu

Author: xxy


Subject Area: Medicine
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-20 16:58:47
Issue 20 has been published, and it went online the same day after the layout fee and proof confirmation were submitted. The efficiency is really high.
Show Review in Original Language
(1) Thank | xxy

Author: 彳亍


Subject Area: Multidisciplinary
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-19 21:43:38
I'm a bit confused, seeking advice from the experts. Initially, two reviewers received feedback, but one of them has not yet provided any comments. Two weeks ago, another reviewer agreed to review the manuscript, but the previous feedback has disappeared. Why is this happening? It's as if there is no feedback from any reviewer now. Also, the process is really slow, it has been almost 4 months since submission and there is still no outcome from the first review!
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 彳亍

Author: niayi


Subject Area: Multidisciplinary
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-18 16:43:54
I would like to ask, for this journal, if it is returned for revision for the first time, will other reviewers be invited, or will it be the same reviewers as the first review?? There has been no response to the revision.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | niayi

Author: wwwddd


Subject Area: Medicine
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-16 14:10:44
I am too, it's been almost two months and it's still "WE".
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | wwwddd

Author: shamllll


Subject Area: Medicine
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-16 04:10:00
Crying, it has been a week since I sent out the invitations, but no one has accepted to review.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | shamllll

Author: shamllll


Subject Area: Medicine
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-16 04:05:38
The first review invited more than 10 people, but it has been five days and no one has accepted the review. I'm crying.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | shamllll

Author: xxy


Subject Area: Medicine
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-15 15:33:56
The entire process went relatively smoothly, and the requirements of comprehensive journals are not too demanding - as long as the publication can be made on time.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | xxy

Author: xxy


Subject Area: Medicine
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-15 15:32:47
Submission received 21 May 2025
Editor assigned 22 May 2025
First reviewer(s) invited 02 Jun 2025
Revision requested 26 Jun 2025
Submission accepted 14 Aug 2025
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | xxy

Author: zxsccccc


Subject Area: Mathematical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-15 14:21:51
Too slow, we have been quiet for over a month.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | zxsccccc

Author: prof青蛙


Subject Area: 心理学
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-15 12:27:58
There is no need to rush, consider that it is very friendly for SCI to not have any updates for a year in China. The editor is also working hard to find reviewers, there is no way to rush it. We can only wait. 

Best wishes for your research.
Show Review in Original Language
(1) Thank | prof青蛙

Author: 蔚蓝海岸


Subject Area: Engineering
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-15 11:50:48
Stuck in WE for a week, now it's too normal.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 蔚蓝海岸

Author: niayi


Subject Area: Multidisciplinary
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-14 00:48:39
Seeking advice from experts on whether to urge for the submission. Thank you.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | niayi

Author: niayi


Subject Area: Multidisciplinary
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-14 00:45:02
Seeking advice from experts, the situation has been like this since the rework.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | niayi

Author: Lalinah1998


Subject Area: Medicine
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-13 14:15:45
Please wait for the reviewer to accept.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Lalinah1998

Author: 收敛无穷大


Subject Area: Engineering
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-12 15:18:37
Can the editor choose? I submitted to the Water Voice special issue.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 收敛无穷大

Author: 俺是小乔


Subject Area: Medicine
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-12 11:49:10
It's been almost 2 months since I submitted my article, but I still haven't found an editor. It's strange. Can you recommend an editor for me? Have any of you encountered the same situation?
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 俺是小乔

Author: kobe22


Subject Area: Life Science学
Duration of Peer Review: 0.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2025-08-10 15:02:17
At least 10 days, up to 45 days. This is the number of days set by the system. However, the actual speed still depends on the reviewer.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | kobe22

First    Previous    1    2    3    4    5    6    7    Next    Last  (To Page
/189)

Start your review of [Scientific Reports]:







© 2010-2025  ACCDON LLC 400 5th Ave, Suite 530, Waltham, MA 02451, USA
PrivacyTerms of Servic