Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science

Profile - Forum · Metrics · Reviews

The boss of the basic ophthalmology journal, has put forward a lot of opinions, a very rigorous journal. The review is relatively fast, and it is a relatively responsible magazine in general. It is very rigorous. It will appear in the publication for seven months. If the experiment is not counted in the middle, it will appear in the publication in four months.

The boss of the basic ophthalmology magazine, besides ebm, has two reviewers, who have provided dozens of comments, which are really helpful to improve the grade of the article. The reviewers are also very straightforward. The good places are praised hard, not good The place is also pointed out mercilessly! The review was very fast, the results were notified within a month and a half of the first review, and the second review responded within two days. It was hired within 4 months and has not been published yet.

iovs authoritative; professional and rigorous reviewers hit the nail on the head; the best journal for basic ophthalmology research, researchers in this field must have masterpieces on iovs in order to be recognized by the industry.

Reposted from: Look at the publication of magazines in specific fields. Experts in some fields pay more attention to professional magazines in that field. Some journals seem to have low impact factors, but they are top-notch in their specific fields, such as ophthalmology iovs, although only 3~4, but if a scientist engaged in ophthalmology research does not have a certain number of articles on it, even if he has some Articles in good general magazines may not be valued by colleagues in this field.

While most comments received were fair and relevant, a few seemed to show that the reviewer was not familiar with the area or were very trivial and would be picked up during routine editing (full stop missing in reference list)