anie

[Back to list of manuscript types]

Manuscript Type: Communications

Please only use the form below if you have been explicitly asked by the editorial office not to use Editorial Manager (for example, because a decision was already made) or if Editorial Manager is unavailable.

Reviewer Instructions

Communications report on experimental and/or theoretical studies in all branches of chemistry; they should be short (see "Please rate the length of the manuscript" below for details). The results must be of general interest or at least contribute to the development of an important area of research. The essential findings presented in a Communication or significant parts of them may not already have appeared in print or in electronic online systems (for example, in online resources, in reviews, proceedings, or preprints). Communications should not be divided into sections. However, experimental details or methods should be summarized concisely under the heading Experimental Section or Methods. The first paragraph of a Communication should be formulated as an introduction that provides the nonspecialist reader with a general idea of the state of the art of the field and allows the importance of the results to be put into perspective. In the final paragraph the results should be summarized succinctly and one sentence should be devoted to their significance and, if appropriate, to the next challenges.

Referee Recommendation

Referees should give an overall recommendation as to whether a manuscript should be published without, with minor, or with major alterations, or should be rejected.

Please formulate the comments for the authors in a polite form, even when heavy criticism is being delivered.

Minor alterations include:

Major alterations include:

Manuscripts that require major alterations will usually be re-evaluated by the referee(s).

Manuscripts that cannot be accepted for publication in Angewandte Chemie could perhaps be acceptable after minor or major improvements—either without further refereeing at all or after further refereeing by the same referees—for publication in one of Angewandte Chemie's sister journals.

In the event of rejection, referees can recommend a different journal, for example one of Angewandte Chemie's sister journals under "5. Please indicate which other journal you consider more appropriate". This procedure should have benefits for both authors and reviewers by facilitating the publication process.

To help us assess the paper we request that you answer the following questions:

1. Please rate the importance of the reported results

Naturally, the judgment of the importance of a paper is to a certain extent subjective. Please note, we are asking for an evaluation of the importance only with regard to publication in Angewandte Chemie. Thus, a paper can be considered to be very important or highly important for a broad and heterogeneous readership and is thus suitable for publication in Angewandte Chemie or it may be "only" important to a particular area and thus is more suitable for journals catering to a more specific audience.

Based on our experience, we anticipate that:

The top 5% of the submitted manuscripts are very important:

Approximately 20% of the submitted manuscripts are highly important:

Another 20% of the submitted manuscripts are important:

A third 20% of the submitted manuscripts are important but too specialized:

We also receive manuscripts that are less important and ill-suited for Angewandte Chemie or its sister journals. Most of these are directly rejected by the editors.

2. Please rate the citation of previous publications

Is all relevant prior work cited and discussed? Or has relevant prior work been overlooked or is not discussed appropriately? Does the manuscript include many papers with low relevance to the current study?

3. Please rate the length of the manuscript

The maximum length of a Communication, inclusive of all literature citations, footnotes, and tables, is 20000 characters; formulas and figures may be added. Longer Communications will be accepted only if their quality warrants special consideration. Details that are of importance to specialists, but not to most of the readers, should be submitted as Supporting Information, which will be made accessible on the Web.

4. Please rate the verification of hypotheses and conclusions by the presented data

Assumptions and hypotheses brought forward in a manuscript must be in accord with the experimental and/or theoretical results. The identity and purity of all new compounds must be fully characterized by appropriate analytical methods (e.g. NMR spectroscopy, X-ray crystal structure analysis, elemental analysis, etc.). These data should be given in the Supporting Information in the event that they exceed the scope of the Experimental Section. The term "Supporting Information" should be taken literally: Readers must be able to read a Communication without needing to retrieve the Supporting Information.

5. Please indicate which other journal you consider more appropriate

In the event that the work is considered more suitable for another journal, referees' can recommend, for example, one of Angewandte's sister journals. These are:

6. Please indicate whether you have included attachments

If you have information that is relevant to the comments and recommendation you have made, this can be sent either as an attachment for the Handling Editor only or for the Author. Where the attachment is for the author, please ensure that any formulations or file information will not give away your identity.

Review Form

Referee e-mail
Manuscript number

1. Please rate the importance of the reported results [help]

Question 1

Naturally, the judgment of the importance of a paper is to a certain extent subjective. Please note, we are asking for an evaluation of the importance only with regard to publication in Angewandte Chemie. Thus, a paper can be considered to be very important or highly important for a broad and heterogeneous readership and is thus suitable for publication in Angewandte Chemie or it may be "only" important to a particular area and thus is more suitable for journals catering to a more specific audience.

  • Very important, should be published as a VIP paper (top 5% of submissions)
  • Highly important, should be published as a Hot paper (top 20% of submissions)
  • Important, for the wider field of chemistry, but not suitable for Angewandte Chemie
  • Too specialized, should be published in a sister journal
  • Not important, should be submitted elsewhere

2. Please rate the citation of previous publications [help]

Question 2

  • Appropriate; relevant prior work is cited and discussed
  • Insufficient; relevant prior work has been overlooked or is not discussed appropriately
  • Superfluous; many papers with low relevance to the current study have been cited

3. Please rate the length of the manuscript [help]

Question 3

The maximum length of a Communication, inclusive of all literature citations, footnotes, and tables, is 20000 characters; formulas and figures may be added. Longer Communications will be accepted only if their quality warrants special consideration. Details that are of importance to specialists, but not to most of the readers, should be submitted as Supporting Information, which will be made accessible on the Web.

  • Concise and correct length
  • Too long; contains unnecessary information
  • Too short; requires additional information

4. Please rate the verification of hypotheses and conclusions by the presented data [help]

Question 4

Assumptions and hypotheses brought forward in a manuscript must be in accord with the experimental and/or theoretical results. The identity and purity of all new compounds must be fully characterized by appropriate analytical methods (e.g. NMR spectroscopy, X-ray crystal structure analysis, elemental analysis, etc.). These data should be given in the Supporting Information in the event that they exceed the scope of the Experimental Section. The term "Supporting Information" should be taken literally: Readers must be able to read a Communication without needing to retrieve the Supporting Information.

  • Fully consistent and accurate
  • Minor inconsistencies or inaccuracies
  • Major inconsistencies or inaccuracies

5. Please indicate which other journal you consider more appropriate [help]

Question 5

Comments for the Authors

Attachments (for authors; 3 MB max. size):

Comments for the Editors

Attachments (editors only; 3 MB max. size):