X
My Account Submit My Manuscript
Letpub, Scientific Editing Services, Manuscript Editing Service

ADVANCED FUNCTIONAL MATERIALS

   For Publishers  New

Browse Journals by Title


Journal name:   ISSN:   Subject area:   IF range: -
Index:   Category:   Open Access:   Sort by:
Journal Cover Design
FREE Webinar: Understanding Research Metrics: What Really Matters?

[ADVANCED FUNCTIONAL MATERIALS]Hello, you are Visitor Number 214540 on this page.

Journal Profile
Journal TitleADVANCED FUNCTIONAL MATERIALS
Journal Title AbbreviationsADV FUNCT MATER
ISSN1616-301X
h-index269
CiteScore
CiteScoreSJRSNIPCiteScore Rank
22.005.8752.450
Subject fieldQuartilesRankPercentile
Category: Materials Science
Subcategory: General Materials Science
Q113 / 460
Category: Materials Science
Subcategory: Condensed Matter Physics
Q18 / 403
Category: Materials Science
Subcategory: General Chemistry
Q110 / 398

Self-Citation Ratio (2019-2020)3.90%
Official Websitehttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1616-3028
Online Manuscript Submissionhttps://www.editorialmanager.com/AFM-JOURNAL
Open AccessNo
PublisherWILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH, PO BOX 10 11 61, WEINHEIM, GERMANY, D-69451
Subject AreaEngineering
Country/Area of PublicationGERMANY
Publication FrequencyMonthly
Year Publication Started2001
Annual Article Volume1382
Indexing (SCI or SCIE)Science Citation Index
Science Citation Index Expanded
Link to PubMed Central (PMC)https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nlmcatalog?term=1616-301X%5BISSN%5D
Average Duration of Peer Review *Authorized Data from Publisher:
Data from Authors: About 2.9 month(s)
Competitiveness *Data from Authors: About 25%
Useful Links
Relevant Journals 【ADVANCED FUNCTIONAL MATERIALS】CiteScore Trend
Comments from Authors
*All review process metrics, such as acceptance rate and review speed, are limited to our user-submitted manuscripts. As such they may not reflect the journals' exact competitiveness or speed.
  • Journals in the Same Subject Area
  • CiteScore Trend


First    Previous    1    2    3    Next    Last  (To Page
/3)
  Reviews on ADVANCED FUNCTIONAL MATERIALS: Write a review
Author: HJUN


Subject Area: Life Science
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2020-03-13 18:27:32
2019-12-4, submission; 2019-12-24, the comments of the reviewers were returned. There were three reviewers, two of them required minor revision, and the other one rejected it, who said it was lacking in innovation. The editor rejected the article; 2019-12-24, my boss refused to accept, appealed and argued; 2020-01-30, the editor replied; the appeal was successful and the status of the manuscript changed from rejection to major revision. 10 days was given for revision, and I was clearly told that it would be sent for review again; 2020-2-8, the revised manuscript was submitted, and the article was revised and the experiments were supplemented according to the reviewers’ requirements; 2020-2-20, accept. There was no need to revise any longer; 2020-3-6, proof; 2020-3-12, online. In general, if you think your article has a bright spot, you must dare to fight for it. I do research on interventional photodynamic therapy, and I hope you can quote it (DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201910084). Finally, I hope that COVID-19 pandemic will end soon.

(39) Thank | HJUN

Author: nana小能手


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-03-15 20:37:55
I submitted it on November 28, 2018, and received review comments on January 2, 2019. There was one positive comment, suggesting minor revision, and there were 11 questions. One reviewer had an extremely bad attitude, saying that the reference electrode used was wrong, and the mercury oxide reference electrode should be used. It was recommended to reject the manuscript. The editor required to make a major revision. I submitted the revision on January 14. I revised each reviewer’s comments, and re-tested a set of data using the mercury oxide reference electrode according to the review comments of the second reviewer who suggested rejection. I received the result of second review on January 19, the first reviewer who required minor revision, thought that there were no problems and it can be published. The second reviewer said that I didn’t answer his questions and still suggested rejecting the manuscript. The editor still suggested making a major revision. I submitted the revision according to the comments of the second review, and told the editor that we had retested in accordance with the requirements of the second reviewer, but he believed that we did not answer his questions. I received the result of the third review on February 11, and sent it to arbitration. The third reviewer thought it was innovative and suggested a minor revision. He asked a very simple question and the editor gave a minor revision. I submitted it on February 12 according to the third review comments. It was accepted on February 13. It was proofed on February 17 and online on February 25. The editor was good. I didn’t know if what the second reviewer did was overlapped with ours, or he had a grudge against us. But I felt that he did not review the manuscript properly. There were many grammatical mistakes in the review comments, he had no idea that the first letter should be capitalized, and his review comment format was not normal.

(27) Thank | nana小能手

Author: emon


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-09-27 09:43:22
I received review comments two weeks after submission. Two reviewers asked for minor revision but the third suggested the work was too similar to that of others, so the editor rejected the manuscript. My instructor suggested that I appeal the decision. I added data and submitted my appeal letter. The editors changed the rejection to a major revision recommendation. After submitting the revised version and undergoing review again, the manuscript was accepted. In general, AFM's review speed is still very fast. My experience is that if you feel that the work is really good, you can directly argue for it, but you should seriously reply to the reviewers’ opinions.

(12) Thank | emon

Author: Wan. S


Subject Area: Physics
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2019-02-11 13:46:36
The article is for ferroelectric memory.The select is rejected, it is recommended to switch to AFM.The first trial was one month, three reviewers, two minor repairs, and one unremarked (there was nothing to reply, this situation was first encountered).Give a week to fill the data, received one month after the modification.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Wan. S

Author: 一晌贪欢


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-10-26 18:02:22
Two weeks to review comments, 10 days after the revision of the use
Show Review in Original Language
(4) Thank | 一晌贪欢

Author: XfZhong


Subject Area: Life Science
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Rejected


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-10-08 15:18:29
Submitted after 10 days was rejected, transferred to Nano Letters result unknown
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | XfZhong

Author: Biomimtic smart


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-08-13 09:10:58
Originally submitted to AM on April 28th, received review comments on May 16th, 3 reviewers, one recommended to select for AM journal, one recommended for acceptance, one recommended for overhaulQuestioning novelty is not enough.Edit rejection.In response to the comments of the reviewers, we re-edited and added the experimental content. On June 19th, we resubmitted it to AFM, and found that it was basically sent back to the reviewers who were opposed by AM among the three reviewers. 7On the 13th of the month, we received the review comments of the minor revisions, and on July 17, we submitted the revised opinions and accepted them on July 18.July 31st proof, August 6th online.
Show Review in Original Language
(7) Thank | Biomimtic smart

Author: 科研绘图


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted directly


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-08-06 17:52:34
Scientific drawing diagram drawing diagram flow chart SCI journal 3D abstract drawing TOC cover drawingPlease add QQ3188675558
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 科研绘图

Author: 958491514@qq.com


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-07-07 01:05:19
5.9 contribution, 6.25 back review comments, two reviewers, one minor repair, one rejection, the editor is very good for the overhaul, 7.2 return the review comments,7.6 Accepted.Joren editor is very very friendly
Show Review in Original Language
(11) Thank | 958491514@qq.com

Author: 958491514@qq.com


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-07-07 01:05:11
5.9 Submission, 6.25 back review comments, two reviewers, one minor repair, one rejection, the editor was very good for the overhaul, 7.2 returned the review comments, 7.6 accepted.Joren editor is very very friendly
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 958491514@qq.com

Author: 545412313@qq.com


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-07-06 17:32:22
May 4th contributionReturn to review comments on June 6th, overhaulJune 15th Amendment comments submitted, received every other day, to force the editor!
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 545412313@qq.com

Author: untill89


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-07-06 14:15:24
Has been under consideration for 27 days without news, looking forward to
Show Review in Original Language
(5) Thank | untill89

Author: 哈哈


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 5.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-06-15 15:31:36
Submitted on January 30, returned on March 3, and went back and forth three times, for a total of four and a half months, finally received.Good things and more grind
Show Review in Original Language
(1) Thank | 哈哈

Author: 小牛犊


Subject Area: Medical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-05-22 07:51:23
Is the review speed slower now?6 weeks of external trial, no news yet
Show Review in Original Language
(12) Thank | 小牛犊

Author: Jimmy


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-05-01 01:30:01
Submit 01.17Reject and encouraged resubmitting 03.16 First trial for two monthsResubmit 05. 16 Seriously revised for one monthAccept without any change 05. 30 for two weeksIt took a total of more than 4 months, a small school, a small research group.An Angew was in the middle of last year. It took a month and a half from submission to acceptance.
Show Review in Original Language
(8) Thank | Jimmy

Author: Jimmy


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-05-01 01:29:10
Submit 01.17Reject and encouraged resubmitting 03.16 First trial for a full monthResubmit 05. 16 Seriously revised for one monthAccept without any change 05. 30 for two weeksIt took a total of more than 4 months, a small school, a small research group.An Angew was in the middle of last year. It took a month and a half from submission to acceptance.
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | Jimmy

Author: 597592827@qq.com


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-04-04 10:58:20
2.6 Submission 2.28 return comments, two reviewers, all minor repairs, edited to overhaul, rehabilitated a week later, 3.13 received 3.30 proof samples Our team is doing biomedical materialsRecently, I have 3 AFMs and 1 AM. Among them, AM has been used for 7 months from submission to receiving. The review period is long. The AFM review is generally from 3 weeks to a month. The speed is fast, the data is still fully characterized, and the details are determined.Success or failure!Share it for everyone to make a reference, a total of ~
Show Review in Original Language
(11) Thank | 597592827@qq.com

Author: 15652354035@163.com


Subject Area: Mathematical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 5.0 month(s)
Result: Accepted after revision


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-03-31 11:23:00
10Submitted on March 27, returning comments on March 10, minor repair.The revised draft was submitted on March 16 and accepted on March 21.Just want to say slow, but it is worth it.
Show Review in Original Language
(3) Thank | 15652354035@163.com

Author: SSL


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Rejected


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-03-03 22:43:17
feel that AFM has been controlled by a few academic academies in China, and there is a high possibility that the submissions without doorways are rejected directly.Circle, Shantou, 哎
Show Review in Original Language
(2) Thank | SSL

Author: SSL


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Rejected


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-03-03 22:42:56
feels that AFM has been controlled by a few academic academies in China, and there is a high possibility that the submissions without doorways are rejected directly.Circle, Shantou, 哎
Show Review in Original Language
(3) Thank | SSL

Author: 华华


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-02-06 18:54:47
1 Submitted on the 30th of the month, is still under consideration, anxiously waiting, do not know to submit it?
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 华华

Author: 华华


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 1.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-02-06 18:53:57
1 month 30 submission, now still under consideration
Show Review in Original Language
(0) Thank | 华华

Author: model2018


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-01-21 13:12:46
contributed 48 days without any news...
Show Review in Original Language
(3) Thank | model2018

Author: MaryC


Subject Area: Engineering and Materials
Duration of Peer Review: 2.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-01-21 02:06:59
has been submitted for more than 1.5 months, no news, waiting
Show Review in Original Language
(2) Thank | MaryC

Author: nicholas


Subject Area: Chemical Science
Duration of Peer Review: 3.0 month(s)
Result: Pending & Unknown


Write a review

Reviewed 2018-01-12 15:08:24
10 mid-month submission, revised after one month, uploading revised manuscript after 10 days, no message yet
Show Review in Original Language
(2) Thank | nicholas

First    Previous    1    2    3    Next    Last  (To Page
/3)

Start your review of [ADVANCED FUNCTIONAL MATERIALS]:





Disclaimer: All information sourced directly from the journals is subject to change. Please use the journal homepage link to verify all information prior to submission.


© 2010-2021  ACCDON LLC 400 5th Ave, Suite 530, Waltham, MA 02451, USA
PrivacyTerms of Service