Currently it is extremely difficult to identify appropriate reviewers for manuscipts, as potential reviewers are overwhelmed with requests. For the last manuscript I had to edit for a journal, I invited 26 (!) reviewers, until finally one single reviewer agreed. All authors want to have their mannuscript swiftly, but many of them are not willing to support the colleagues.

there are many reasons for delaying and postponing the desired course of events. Reasons can lie in the editorship or with the consultants. Illness and unforeseen events play a role. It is not customary not to receive a message from the editorial office if the issue for which the article was intended has appeared. You should in any case make a request, because it is possible that the editor has decided to move the article to the next issue without informing the author. Of course, you can also ask a member of the editorial staff in advance how far things stand.

I think it is unforeseen of reviewer is one of the reseaon delaying process.

I had the same situation with XXX journal as the review process should take 2-3 months but it had been more than 6 months without any reply from the journal. I have sent email to the editor asking about the delay reason, and this was his reply:

Dear Author

Thank you for your email.

It is unfortunate that the review process is not completed.

It is also unfortunate that none of the reviewers to whom we sent your paper did reply us. Despite the reminder, nothing we got so far.

We truly apologise for this situation and we would like to give you the following two options for you to decide:

1- Start the review process again with new real potential reviewers to be nominated by you and our reviewers

2- Withdraw the paper as the review process may take at least 2 to 3 months.

Please let us know your decision.

We repeat again our apologies and thank you for understanding.

Regards

Currently it is extremely difficult to identify appropriate reviewers for manuscipts, as potential reviewers are overwhelmed with requests. For the last manuscript I had to edit for a journal, I invited 26 (!) reviewers, until finally one single reviewer agreed. All authors want to have their mannuscript swiftly, but many of them are not willing to support the colleagues.

Thanks so much for your response.. Hein Retter J. M. Koli Hadeel Saleh Haj Aliwi Christian G Meyer Your response has helped greatly.

Is it advisable to withdraw a manuscript from such delaying journals who never deem it fit to update the author?

It may be useful if you first ask the managing editor about the status of your article.

The review process is very complex. No reputable journal will like to delay the manuscripts of its authors unnecessarily. Due to high volume of papers, the review process may seem a bit slow because some journals will insist on using particular experts in order not to compromise standards. Therefore, before sending manuscripts out, potential authors should digest the 'Authors Guidelines' and have first time information about the average review period. Where the process seems to be delayed, send a reminder as Nina Petkova earlier indicated. Then follow up two or three more times before the option of withdrawal. Please note that no journal will like to miss the opportunity of publishing a good research. Thanks.

The factors are numerous as earlier stated, especially when the editorial board members are not direct experts on the topic in consideration (e.g. the organism of concern). Some journals have devise a means of placing your manuscript on a 20-day trial to notify you if they have found suitable reviewers.

Another reason is if you have not asked the editor about the progress of your manuscript after several months because these people are also very busy in their institutions. I remembered, a reminder was sent to the editor of a journal on one of my manuscript after 6 months, and I was told that they are awaiting the response of the second reviewer.

I also observe that reputable journals take so much time to assess manuscripts... least is 2-3 months. And it could be very painful when your manuscript has been delayed for not less than 6-9 months, with a rejection decision.

To avoid delays, I think checking up with the editor is a good point.

I am an editor of a journal. It has meanwhile become extremely difficult to identify reviewers who are willing to evaluate the worlk of colleagues. One may invite 20 potential reviewers and, if one is lucky, one reviewer agrees. Everybody wants his manuscript to be reviewed quickly, but this becomes more and more difficult.

Thanks for your valuable and helpful comments. Dr @AbdulMojeed Yakub, Dr Christian Meyer, Dr Paul Odeniran and Dr Adrian Ramirez.

High volume of research is on,so papers are more ,but reviewers are not sufficiently available, but time available for good reviewr is very short, may be remuenrations not sufficient area of research is now a days very diversified, so very difficult to get proper reviewer

Thanks all for your response

Some time editor does not get suitable reviewer; it may be reviewer too busy, there may be many other factors.

Thanks for your contributions Dr Tapas Chatterjee

I've seen this before. This is not unusual, because reviewers are wanted and there is too little. Sometimes a lack of interest in the manuscript can cause the editors to postpone an answer. Very bad manuscripts are immediately rejected with a friendly answer.

Thanks Dr hein Retter This is so on point.

This could be challenging and hard to face.

What can you suggest to be done in such cases?

We can't blame Editors or reviewers alone for the delay in process. I think, many a times authors are also responsible for the delay in the process. I feel, some people intentionally put paper in journals where the scope doesn't matches 80-100% to get reviewers irrelevant to their field (because they know their work will be rejected by quality reviewer of their own field). This way to avoid quality reviewers of their own field is major cause for delay. However, i think 1) Following journal format 2) Use of correct keywords 3) submission in a journal where scope of manuscript matches the most, and finally, 4) easy traceable revisions are keys for faster publications.

Great response Dr @ashish