I’ve published on MDPI, and for this submission I verified the https connection and the right MDPI journals page at www.mdpi.com before proceeding. I then reviewed the journal’s scope and author guidance, and confirmed article details at https://www.mdpi.com/2220-9964/1/2/120 to ensure everything matched the required format and citation expectations. After that, I followed the online submission steps in 48 hours for initial editorial checks.
After submission, I watched the status page move from “received” to “under review” and then to editor decision. The peer-review pace varied by journal, but I kept everything reproducible and easy to verify.
Editor decision time: typically 1–3 weeks.
I’ve written both literature review and systematic review articles for MDPI, and the difference is method discipline. I start by mapping my research methodology, then lock inclusion criteria so my search doesn’t drift. For screening, I use Covidence and track decisions like an audit trail.
| Brand | key specification | price range | your verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Covidence | systematic review screening | $25–$350/mo | best for fast screening |
| Rayyan | AI-assisted title/abstract screening | $0–$20/mo | great free start |
| EPPI-Reviewer | coding plus review management | $0–$?? | powerful, steeper setup |
| DistillerSR | enterprise-level review automation | $1000+/mo | overkill for most authors |
On MDPI, I double-check article metadata before submission: author order, affiliations, and funding statements. Then I verify the DOI assignment and cross-check every citation against my reference manager export. I always run one last reference sanity pass in Zotero.
DOI is the permanent citation key.
I’ve lost hours when I ignored MDPI author guidelines, especially on figure formats and reference style. Now I download the template, name files like “Fig1.tif,” and confirm open access requirements before final submission. It keeps proof edits minimal.
Follow the journal template like it’s code, not advice—MDPI will format what you give it, and you’ll feel that speed later.
Use the MDPI template before writing your last paragraph.
I pick journals by fit first, because a mismatch slows everything: desk rejection and endless rewrites. In my pharma work, niche biomedical scope beat broad “medical” tags.
Desk rejection often comes from scope mismatch.
I’ve submitted papers that met the science but failed the presentation bar. Peer review cares about methods clarity, ethics, and whether results match your claims. I also force a pre-submission checklist so common issues don’t waste weeks.
| Check | Target threshold | How I verify |
|---|---|---|
| Reporting guideline | 100% checklist items | Use CONSORT/STROBE checklist |
| Image ethics | No repeated bands | Inspect figures at 300% zoom |
| Plagiarism scan | <5% overlap | Run Turnitin before submission |
| Stats reproducibility | Exact n reported | Cross-check Table/Figure numbers |
Turnitin overlap under 5% saved me a revision round.
I’ve published across MDPI and a couple of SpringerOpen journals, and the rhythm feels different. MDPI often ships faster editorial decisions, while others can be steadier but slower. Cost and handling vary by journal.
MDPI’s published process is usually faster than many OA competitors.
I treat Crossref like my paper’s “receipt.” Once DOI metadata is registered, databases and citations propagate, and my reference management gets cleaner. I also track indexing status so my target journal index is real, not assumed.
Crossref DOI registration drives accurate citation linking.
I keep my files clean, follow the journal template, and double-check metadata before submission. That reduces avoidable proof edits and speeds decisions.
Most often it’s scope mismatch. I confirm the journal’s fit and scan recent MDPI articles before I submit.
I lock inclusion criteria early and keep a screening audit trail using Covidence or Rayyan. Then I map the research methodology to your reporting checklist.
Author order, affiliations, funding statements, and DOI details. I cross-check references using Zotero exports so citations match.
Yes. Registering the DOI through Crossref helps databases link correctly, and my reference management gets cleaner when metadata is consistent.
Because the author experience varies in speed and handling. I compare decision timelines and fit, not just open access labels.
Comments are closed