How long does it take to get published?

[devildoc2]

---

Members do not see this ad.

OK so we submitted a paper in which I am 2nd author, back in October.

We havent heard anything yet. How long does it take for the journal to let you know if they are going to publish you or not? I know sometimes they want revisions. Since I havent heard back from them, does that mean that the paper was rejected or what?

 

[jjmack]

congrats on the work. My experience is that waiting that long usually isn't good. However, if the work is really bad they usually tell you right away and just don't review it at all. I just got a paper publish on which i was a second author and it took a while. The first time we submitted it to one journal it took around 6-8 weeks to hear back. They gave us some comments and after we revised it was accepted two days later. Don't give up hope.

 

[pseudoknot]

It doesn't mean anything as far as your paper's chances. Some journals are really slow about sending things out for review, and reviewers often sit on things for a while. I've heard of papers not coming back for nearly a year and still being accepted.

OK so we submitted a paper in which I am 2nd author, back in October.

We havent heard anything yet. How long does it take for the journal to let you know if they are going to publish you or not? I know sometimes they want revisions. Since I havent heard back from them, does that mean that the paper was rejected or what?

 

[ninebillion]

devildoc2, which journal did you submit to?

 

[devildoc2]

devildoc2, which journal did you submit to?

Magnetic Resonance in Medicine

 

[BandGeek]

I would check the journal submission page to see if there is a reviewer deadline for primary review. My research mentors have both been editors a journal (Biology of Reproduction) and there is a six week deadline for them. I only wish they were held to that deadline here at school. My mentor had my thesis for nine months before he even moved it off his desk!
Good luck!

 

[JohnnyJ]

Its variable depending on the journal and how much pull your PI has with the editors.

Theres also a fair amount of politics in play when some of the reviewers want to screw you around as they try to reproduce the work in their own labs and try to publish the work ahead of you.

 

[devildoc2]

Update: Well, the paper was rejected, but they did accept the abstract.

Is that even worth listing on my resume, or are abstracts mostly worthless?

 

[microTAS]

Update: Well, the paper was rejected, but they did accept the abstract.

I was less than clear on what you said. Do you mean they're asking for extensive revision?

 

[devildoc2]

I was less than clear on what you said. Do you mean they're asking for extensive revision?

No, they never asked for revisions. They notified us that they wouldnt accept the paper because it was too similar to another paper that our group had published previously in journal of radiology. However, they did accept the abstract as part of their annual ISMRM meeting.

 

[microTAS]

No, they never asked for revisions. They notified us that they wouldnt accept the paper because it was too similar to another paper that our group had published previously in journal of radiology. However, they did accept the abstract as part of their annual ISMRM meeting.

I'd still put it down. It was accepted to a national professional organization's conference.