[Back to list of manuscript types]

Manuscript Type: Communications Revised Version

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

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 ChemNanoMat 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 ChemNanoMat's sister journals.

In the event of rejection, referees can recommend a different journal 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

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 ChemNanoMat. Thus, a paper can be considered to be very important or important for a broad and heterogeneous readership and is thus suitable for publication in ChemNanoMat. A highly specialized paper might not be important for ChemNanoMat but only for a specific area of materials chemistry.

Based on our experience, we anticipate that:

The top 10% of the submitted manuscripts are very important:

Another 20% of the submitted manuscripts are important:

The remainder (70%) of the submitted Communications are either important but too specialized, less important, or minor:

2. Please rate the length of the manuscript

Communications should be short and concise. They are usually limited in length to four template pages. 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.

3. Are further changes/additions required

Please include any comments for the further improvement of the paper in the "Comments to Author" box.

4. Please indicate which other journal(s) you consider more appropriate (optional)

In the event that the work is considered more suitable for publication elsewhere, referees can recommend another journal, for example:

5. 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 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.

Communications report on experimental and/or theoretical studies in all branches of materials chemistry; they should be short (see "Please rate the length of the manuscript" 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. Communications require an Abstract, which should be brief (600–1000 characters) and not too technical. 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.

Review Form

Referee e-mail
Manuscript number

1. Please rate the importance of the revised manuscript [help]

Question 1

  • Very important (top 10% of Communications)
  • Important (next 20% of Communications)
  • Important but too specialized for the wider field of materials chemistry
  • Less important, should be submitted elsewhere
  • Minor, is not publishable in this form

2. Please rate the length of the revised manuscript [help]

Question 2

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

3. Are further changes/additions required [help]

Question 3

  • No
  • Yes, see Comments to Author
    . Please include any comments for the further improvement of the paper in the "Comments to Author" box.

4. Please indicate which other journal(s) you consider more appropriate (optional) [help]

Question 4

Comments for the Authors

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

Comments for the Editors

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