ArticleIndian journal of psychological medicine2022
Why Do Manuscripts Get Rejected? A Content Analysis of Rejection Reports from the Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine.
Article in Indian journal of psychological medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Manuscript Rejection on the Pretext of "Limited Space": An Ethical and Economic Dilemma.Journal of bioethical inquiry · 2026Article
- Does ChatGPT enhance equity for global health publications? Copyediting by ChatGPT compared to Grammarly and a human editor.PloS one · 2026Article
- Skills from a 79-year-old Essay on Politics by Orwell Applied to Scientific Writing.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2025Article
- Writing Manuscript "Bookends": Strategies to Effectively Frame Science.Health behavior research · 2024Article
- Article
- Why do manuscripts submitted to the Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation get rejected?Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- "Publish or Perish": barriers to research publication in an undergraduate medical research program.BMC research notes · 2023Article
- Boil the Ocean: No Apologies for Setting the Standard High!Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2023Article
- Dying Declaration: Musings from the Outgoing Editor.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2023Article
- Fate of Manuscripts Rejected by a Specialty Psychiatry Journal: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2022Article
- Exploring the Attitudes and Perceptions of Master of Medical Education Graduates Towards Research Publication in Saudi Arabia.Advances in medical education and practice · 2022Article
- English as the language of research: But are we missing the mark?Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2021Article
- Do the Criteria of Our Best-Paper Awards Need Revision?Indian journal of psychological medicine · 2021Article
- Advice to authors for avoiding flaws in preparation of original research manuscripts.Perspectives in clinical researchArticle
- Trust but verify: An analysis of redundant publications from two major psychiatry journals in India.Indian journal of psychiatryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A proportion of manuscripts submitted to scientific journals get rejected, for varied reasons. A systematic analysis of the reasons for rejection will be relevant to editors, reviewers, and prospective authors. We aimed to analyze the reasons for rejection of manuscripts submitted to the Methods: We performed a content analysis of the rejection reports of all the articles submitted to the journal between January 1, 2018, and May 15, 2020. Rejection reports were extracted from the manuscript management website and divided into three types: desk rejections, post-peer-review rejections, and post-editorial-re-review rejections. They were analyzed separately for the rejection reasons, using a predefined coding frame. Results: A total of 898 rejection reports were available for content analysis. Rejection was a common fate for manuscripts across the types of submission; figures ranged from 26.7% for viewpoint articles to 72.1% for review articles. The median time to desk rejection was 3 days, while the median time to post-peer-review rejection and post-editorial-re-review rejection was 42 days and 96 days, respectively. The most common reasons for desk rejection were lack of novelty or being out of the journal's scope. Inappropriate study designs, poor methodological descriptions, poor quality of writing, and weak study rationale were the most common rejection reasons mentioned by both peer reviewers and editorial re-reviewers. Conclusions: Common reasons for rejection included poor methodology and poorly written manuscripts. Prospective authors should pay adequate attention to conceptualization, design, and presentation of their study, apart from selecting an appropriate journal, to avoid rejection and enhance their manuscript's chances of publication.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.