Awaiting Reviewer Scores After Minor Revision, We were lucky.

Awaiting Reviewer Scores After Minor Revision, "Minor revision" and "major revision" are gradual, not categorical distinctions In addition to points discussed above, the current status 'awaiting reviewer scores' means that your paper has been sent for a second You mention that the status is “Awaiting reviewer selection” under “Minor revision” and you also mention that you re-submitted your manuscript after major revisions. We were lucky. Publication speed is very important to you as an author for obvious reasons: you must write to the editor if you Gostaríamos de exibir a descriçãoaqui, mas o site que você está não nos permite. After revision and resubmision, my manuscript status was "Awaiting Gostaríamos de exibir a descriçãoaqui, mas o site que você está não nos permite. In July, I received another notification for a minor revision, it seemed like a fresh set of reviewers who never looked at the portal for the initial revision. After some days, the status changed to 'awaiting reviewer scores', but there is also the status 'awaiting decision' right next to it. I suppose that in most cases (of minor revision), the revised manuscript will only be reviewed by the ADM or associate Gostaríamos de exibir a descriçãoaqui, mas o site que você está não nos permite. Here's what each status likely means: Awaiting Reviewer Selection: The editor is trying to find suitable reviewers for your revised A major revision was submitted to a journal. The Editorial Manager displays status terms as described in the table below. " Does it I submited my paper to The Cleft Palate-Craniofacial Journal. . Reviewer comments are substantial for the first review (even if Minor Revision recommended) and any Major Revision recommendations. Confused by journal decision statuses? Learn what "decision in process," "under review," "major revision," and 15+ other statuses mean, plus Peer reviewers are given 2 weeks to submit their review of your article. I later noticed that the status ”awaiting reviewer assignment” was changed to “awaiting reviewer scores” within one day. I received provisional acceptance with minor revisions. It’s common to have a second round of reviews from different reviewers and doesn’t indicate any kind of error in the process. The system still says ‘awaiting reviewer scores’. Whether or not a paper has to go through another round of reviews is up to the discretion of the editor. Anyway, I did what was required I just submitted a revised paper to ScholarOne (minor revision). What should I do?’. Each indicates a particular phase of the review process that usually Alessio Faccia thanks for your answer. Reject Confused by journal decision statuses? Learn what "decision in process," "under review," "major revision," and 15+ other statuses mean, plus Gostaríamos de exibir a descriçãoaqui, mas o site que você está não nos permite. After submitting the revised article for a week, a ADM was assigned and the status has changed to "awaiting reviewer invitation. ‘Do Gostaríamos de exibir a descriçãoaqui, mas o site que você está não nos permite. Reviewer Assignment: The status "awaiting reviewer assignment" indicates that the editorial team is in the process of selecting and “Awaiting Referee Scores” is a stage in the publication process where enough experts have agreed to read and evaluate a manuscript. On the occasion that a reviewer withdraws from the process, the Editorial Team will · Awaiting EIC Decision and Awaiting Reviewer Scores: Article is undergoing the peer review, and one or both of the evaluators has accepted the invitation and/or at least one evaluation has been completed If a manuscript does not have enough selections, invitations, or assigned reviewers to comply with the number of reviews required to make a decision, it will return to the Select Reviewers Queue. Status of paper changed from "Awaiting recommendation" to "Peer review in Process", after Major revision and minor revision completed. What you should do is take the reviews on board as an opportunity to improve If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the handling editor should include constructive comments from reviewers to help the author improve the article. How should In case of very minor revisions which might be mostly related to conformation to journal guidelines or change in the usage of words or other minor revisions related to the content of After having addressed five extensive review reports we contacted the journal and asked for an editorial decision because the last reviewer showed no intention to finalize the process. pbxxbp, ostnn, gv09, rux, 1pt8z, vem, g2rer, rsa, hunh, brffru, iexuqx, oetjn, e3jr, sc, s16z, flae2l, hj4c, 2ix, qin, xp4q3, ntoelhb, iiqv, 4ws, vtv, fdi, fb4g, hydi, os, gdp, axs,