Dianthus Medical Blog Archive

A new record in biomedical publishing?

I have recently done a little piece of research on whether professional medical writers improve the quality of biomedical publications, and am now ready to get it published. Sadly, I have just had the paper rejected by the journal PLoS One, but in the process I think I may have set a new publishing record, albeit perhaps not the most prestigious record in the whole world.

The online manuscript submission system of PLoS one gives a detailed timeline of what happens to the manuscript. Here is what the timeline looks like for mine:

StageStart Date
Decision Sent to Author2010-05-28 05:08:59
Manuscript Rejected2010-05-28 05:08:58
Under Review2010-05-28 05:07:06
Section Editor Assigned2010-05-28 05:07:06
Waiting for Section Editor Assignment2010-05-28 05:06:47
Initial QC Complete2010-05-28 05:06:46
Initial QC Started2010-05-21 07:23:11
Author Approved Converted Files2010-05-21 07:23:10
Waiting for Author Approval of Converted Files2010-05-21 06:00:06
File Conversion Complete2010-05-21 06:00:06
Waiting for File Conversion2010-05-21 05:51:18
Waiting for Files to be Sorted2010-05-21 05:49:17
Manuscript Submitted2010-05-21 05:49:17
Manuscript Files Submitted2010-05-21 05:49:17

You will notice that it took just 1 minute and 52 seconds after my manuscript was assigned to an editor before it was rejected. My rejection letter also included the phrase "Having discussed the paper with our internal editors", so that 1 minute and 52 seconds presumably also included time for that discussion as well as reading the paper.

Is this a new record for the time taken for a journal to reject a paper?

← Toothbrushing and cardiovascular disease Papers from the past →

5 responses to "A new record in biomedical publishing?"