![editor assignment pending to review completed editor assignment pending to review completed](https://s3.amazonaws.com/cdn.freshdesk.com/data/helpdesk/attachments/production/6072471011/logo/uqAUaRSFrPKXZ31MvRW-ncXrvU39ujqwaA.png)
- Chinese (Traditional)
- Springer Support
- Solution home
- Author and Peer Reviewer Support
![](http://farmaciacoslada.online/777/templates/cheerup1/res/banner1.gif)
Editorial process after submission
This article shows the editorial process after Submitting a manuscript to a journal .
Stage 1: Initial quality check
This stage includes checks on authorship, competing interests, ethics approval and plagiarism.
We oversee this process to ensure that your manuscript contains everything our editors and peer reviewers need to perform a fair and thorough assessment of your work.
Stage 2: Editor assigned
Once your manuscript passes the initial quality check, we assign it to a member of Editorial Board, who is an active researcher in your field.
If the editor is satisfied with your work, they will choose appropriate peer reviewers to evaluate your work, taking into account several factors including expertise, experience and apparent conflicts of interest.
Stage 3: Peer review
Reviewers will assess the technical soundness and scientific validity of your methods, analysis and interpretation, all of which must be appropriate, properly conducted, ethically robust and fully supported by the data.
For additional information, please check our peer review policies for Springer , BMC and Nature portfolio or visit the respective journal website.
Stage 4: Decision
The editor will then decide whether to accept your work as is, request minor or major revisions, or reject the paper due to unresolvable concerns. In case of a rejection, an article transfer will be considered.
For all subsequent steps, please check Next steps for publishing your article: What to expect after acceptance .
Related Articles
- Locate submission instructions for a Springer journal
- Submissions to Nature Journal
- Submit a manuscript with your ORCID number
- Submit a Nature Portfolio manuscript for Open Access publishing
- Submit multimedia files to be published online with your article
- Artwork submission instructions
- Rejection of your paper / manuscript
- Journal Article Publishing Support Center
To post social content, you must have a display name. The page will refresh upon submission. Any pending input will be lost.
How can I make changes to a completed review in Editorial Manager?
If a reviewer has made an error or has further comments after submitting a review, it may be possible to reopen or edit the review before the decision is sent to the author.
Once an editor has saved a decision, the existing reviewer comments are copied into the editor's form, where the editor can make changes. After that, any changes to past Reviewer Comments will not be automatically updated within the editor decision form, or the author letter. Instead, updates must be made either within the Decision form, or in the Draft Decision Letter, in order for those changes to be seen by the author.
- Log in and go to your Reviewer Main Menu.
- Select ' Completed Assignments ' and locate the completed review you wish to change. See How do I find a submission I was invited to review in Editorial Manager?
- To view your comments as submitted, select View Reviewer Comments.
- If there is no Send E-mail link, contact us via the channels at the bottom of this page.
- Customize the email text to explain why you need to make changes to your completed review.
- Select ' Preview and Send ', and then ' Send E-mail '.
The journal should respond in one of these ways:
- If the editors have not started any decision, they may be able to Reopen the review. In that case you will receive a new Reviewer Invitation letter, and it will move back to your Pending Assignments folder.
- The journal may be able to manually edit your completed review to make the changes you request.
- If the decision has already been sent to the author, it may be too late to make any changes.
If a reviewer requests changes to a completed review before the decision is sent to author, and you agree the changes should be made:
- Other statuses such as Invited, agreed to review, and Partial Review Saved are displayed as unlinked text.
- (None) could mean the reviewer was not invited for that revision, was uninvited/declined, etc.
- Reviewers that have been declined/uninvited without ever agreeing for any revision are not displayed at all in this table.
- No Decision (in red) indicates the editor assignment is still active.
- If the editor assignment was ended by some other means, such as a Skip or Termination, that is not a hyperlink.
- Just above the corresponding author, any Author Decision Letter that has been sent is displayed as a hyperlink.
- If so, the author has been notified of the decision and so changes cannot be made to the review comments.
- In that case, the editor form will have an author-facing version or reviewer comments saved. You may still be able to edit the reviewer forms as described below, but that will not automatically reflected on the version that will be sent to the author.
- Once an editor decision has been saved, authors will only see changes to reviewer comments that are done as part of Editor Decision or Author Notification steps.
- If the reviewer agreed to review, and then was terminated by an editor, a link [Terminated by Editor] appears in place of the recommendation term, selecting this allows you "Edit review comments" as described below. In this case the review status will change from Terminated to Completed when you save the review as described below.
- When you select any Reviewer Recommendation term link to open the review, you may have either one or both of these options , depending on your permission and the submission status.
- Reopen review : sends a new invitation to the reviewer so they can resubmit a new review; this is available only before a decision has been made.
- Edit Reviewer Comments : opens the review form in edit mode, allowing you to edit almost any part of the reviewer's response. You will not be able to edit the reviewer's choices for Article Transfer options .
'Reopen Review' steps
- Read the warning, then select ' OK ' to confirm the action.
- The Re-open Review and Customize Letters screen will appear.
- Select an Invitation letter.
- For example, if the reviewer requested this be done you could say 'as you requested', or if the reviewer left out an important part of the review you can add those details to the new invitation.
- Let the reviewer know they can find the review under "Pending Assignments".
- Leave any merge codes (text between %% symbols) unchanged.
- Select ' Confirm Selection and Send Letter '.
- The status may change, depending on the number of required reviews . For example, if the status was previously required reviews complete, but reopening this review lowers the number of completed reviews past the requirement, the status will revert to Under Review.
- You may want to edit the Reviewer Due date. Select the "Details" link for the submission. If you do have permission to edit review due dates, you will be able to change the date next to the reviewer's name, and then select "Save and Close" at the bottom. See here for more detailed steps.
'Edit Reviewer Comments' steps
- Read the warning , then select "OK" to reload in edit mode.
- Changes are not reversible, once you save the form the previous version cannot be recovered.
- You will not be able to view or edit the reviewer's choices for Article Transfer options .
- Select ' Save and Close ' when done with changes.
Was this answer helpful?
Thank you for your feedback, it will help us serve you better. If you require assistance, please scroll down and use one of the contact options to get in touch.
Help us to help you:
Thank you for your feedback!
- Why was this answer not helpful?
- It was hard to understand / follow.
- It did not answer my question.
- The solution did not work.
- There was a mistake in the answer.
- Feel free to leave any comments below: Please enter your feedback to submit this form
![](http://farmaciacoslada.online/777/templates/cheerup1/res/banner1.gif)
Related Articles:
- How do I make a decision in Editorial Manager?
- Video Guide: Making changes to your completed review in Editorial Manager
- How do I find a submission I was invited to review in Editorial Manager?
- Reviewer Guide to Editorial Manager
- How do I make changes after I have submitted an article?
For further assistance:
Get the Reddit app
This subreddit is for discussing academic life, and for asking questions directed towards people involved in academia, (both science and humanities).
"Editor assignment pending" for 20 days after submission?
Hi there! I've submitted a paper to a known (Springer) journal of my field the 7th of this month. On the 12th (3 full working days!) the status on the editorial manager swithced from "article submitted" to "editor assignment pending". And it's still in this status today. Am I interpreting this correctly that in 20 days the paper hasn't even been sent to an editor?
If that's indeed the case... What should I do? My PI is starting to suggest to withdraw the paper and submit it somewhere else.
By continuing, you agree to our User Agreement and acknowledge that you understand the Privacy Policy .
Enter the 6-digit code from your authenticator app
You’ve set up two-factor authentication for this account.
Enter a 6-digit backup code
Create your username and password.
Reddit is anonymous, so your username is what you’ll go by here. Choose wisely—because once you get a name, you can’t change it.
Reset your password
Enter your email address or username and we’ll send you a link to reset your password
Check your inbox
An email with a link to reset your password was sent to the email address associated with your account
Choose a Reddit account to continue
![](http://farmaciacoslada.online/777/templates/cheerup1/res/banner1.gif)
IMAGES
COMMENTS
1. It's usually best to try not to infer much from the status of a paper listed in an electronic editorial system. These tools are intended more for the editorial staff than the author, and are often used inconsistently or inaccurately. If you feel your paper is taking an inordinate amount of time to review, then contact the handling editor ...
This could mean one of the following: 'reject', 'submit as new', 'major revision, 'minor revision' or 'accept' (Depending on the journal, options may change). Any decision above 'major revision' is good, meaning you get a chance to improve the paper and hopefully get to full accept. Of course the paper can still be rejected at any stage until ...
The reviews have been completed and the system administrator or the journal manager assigned the editor (who is assumed to be associated with it earlier) to take care of the review reports and make a call. The number of review reports is not sufficient. It would be re-reviewed and handled by another editor. It is a software issue or a bug.
If so, the admin review is complete, and the manuscript should now proceed to the AE review. Here is a similar query we received some time back: What does it mean if the status changes directly from "Editor assignment pending" to "Required reviews completed"? In case it means that the AE review is complete, the next step might be either a peer ...
The status "Editor assignment pending" means that your paper has still not been assigned to an editor. In general, revised submissions are assigned to the same editor who was handling it the first time. In this case, it is possible that the editor is now busy and is unable to take on your manuscript at the moment, which is why the status shows ...
Stage 4: Decision. The editor will then decide whether to accept your work as is, request minor or major revisions, or reject the paper due to unresolvable concerns. In case of a rejection, an article transfer will be considered. For all subsequent steps, please check Next steps for publishing your article: What to expect after acceptance.
The status reviews completed was for one week and then it changed to with editor again for last 10 days. Now my question is if it is rejection then the editor would immediately send the rejection ...
The status "required reviews completed back to editor assigned" in a manuscript submission system typically means that the peer review process for the manuscript has been completed, and the ...
If a reviewer requests changes to a completed review before the decision is sent to author, and you agree the changes should be made: Locate the submission in EM and select 'View Reviews and Comments' to open a popup window . Each reviewer connected to the submission is listed, followed by each assigned editor, and then by the corresponding author.
Once this is done, the paper is assigned to an Associate Editor (AE) who is responsible for the manuscript till the final decision. The status "Editor assignment pending" means that your paper has still not been assigned to an AE. You have not mentioned how long it has been since you submitted your paper; however, if it has been more than a ...
Hence the first Editor Assigned to Under Review. The reason with it is now Editor Assigned can be due to several reasons. This depends a lot on the manuscript management system, and the editorial practices. ... This is simple.The reviews have been completed and the concerned editor has been assigned by the journal manager to evaluate the review ...
6. Decision notification e-mails and what they mean. There are several decisions that authors may receive after submitting their paper to one of the Society's journals: Reject without review: The Action Editor has rejected the paper without sending it for peer review. Reject: The paper has been through the peer review process and the Action ...
If reviewers from the previous round are not available (no response or decline to re-review), then it is the task of the editor to evaluate if the comments have been addressed satisfactorily. If the previous editorial decision was B (minor revisions), only the editor will see the author responses and will make a decision based on them. Timeline
On the 18th, it remained 'Editor Assigned Pending,' but on the 19th, it switched to 'Review Completed.' This caught my attention. It had been 'Editor Assigned Pending' for a month and I assumed it hadn't reached the editor yet, so it appears as though the review process only took a day. -
Dear all, I have submitted a manuscript to the Journal of Integrated Circuits on 06/08/2019. I have been checking the online submission status right from the first day. All along it was " Editor assignment pending" and just one day ago, it was updated to "Required Reviews Completed". I am getting anxious. Why is there is no change in the status like "Under review"?
You are likely in a similar situation. I have submitted to a journal where "editor assignment pending" meant assignment of reviewers by the editor was pending, not that the assignment of an editor at all was pending. And it can definitely take 20 days to find three people willing to review a paper.
Status changes directly from "Editor assignment pending" to "Required reviews completed" Dear all, I have submitted a manuscript to the Journal of Integrated Circuits on 06/08/2019. I have been checking the online submission status right from the first day.
It has now been more than two weeks since then, but the status is still 'Editor Assignment Pending.' I emailed the journal editor on May 19, but got no reply. ... of your manuscript's acceptance by learning how to prepare a manuscript for journal submission and handle the peer review process. Subscribe and get curated content that will ...
Now it is "Editor Assignment Pending". ... Editor assignment pending after "review competed" 4. ... Editor Assigned Pending to Reviews Completed in Less Than a Day. Hot Network Questions Dial "M" for murder Polar coordinate plot incorrectly plotting with PGF Plots A short story where a space pilot has a device that sends the ship back in ...
After the review process, editor is assigned to check the quality of the paper and the reviewers comments. Usually, an article being assigened to an editor after review is a good thing. If there was going to be a rejection, after the reviewers grading, your article would have been rejected. You must have received positive reviews.