Testimonials

The experiences with publishing with IJERPH was positive. Reviewers were insightful with their comments and provided guidance on ways to strengthen various aspects of the manuscript, particularly in description of the background and rationale for the study, as well as in the discussion of the findings for research and practice. Administrative support was very helpful with questions quickly answered which was immensely appreciated.

Article in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health: Refugee Family Health Brokers’ (FHBs’) Experiences with Health Care Providers: A Thematic Analysis

Less

Our team was very satisfied with the experience of publishing in your journal. The template was a bit cumbersome to enter the text into but worth it given how it generated a draft version of the article for submission. We assume this helped speed up the publication process which was the number one reason we liked this experience. Our paper was reviewed and published more quickly than any other journal article we have published.

Article in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health: Leveraging the Expertise of the Community: A Case for Expansion of a Peer Workforce in Child, Adolescent, and Family Mental Health

Less

Congratulations on 20 years for the IJERPH journal. We have appreciated our experiences publishing with IJERPH. The journal is very timely in its reviews, comprehensive in its response to authors, and provides authors with an array of metrics related to published articles.

Article in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health: Associations between Housing Factors and Respiratory Symptoms in Two Saskatchewan First Nations Communities

Less

The process has been very efficient, good feedback from reviewers, and high visibility for our work.

Article in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health: What Can Public Health Administration Learn from the Decision-Making Processes during COVID-19?

Less

Publishing with IJERPH has always been a simple, timely process. Reviews are completed quickly and the editors have excellent, clear, and responsive communication. The journal seems to be well-staffed and provides all the infrastructure needed for a smooth and quick process. Once the article is accepted, editors are quick to integrate needed final edits and proofing.

Special Issue in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health: Adolescent Health Risk Behaviors and Mental Health

Less

All of my experiences publishing with IJERPH have been wonderful. The journal is a well-oiled machine and in many ways is a model for how the peer-review process should be run. They allow a your-paper-your-way initial submission format which substantially reduces barriers to submission. The peer reviews and action decision typically come in within 3–5 weeks, and the peer reviews have generally been high quality and fair in my experience. I have never seen a journal move so quickly on resubmissions and expedite the time to the final version appearing online after acceptance. I wish all journals could operate with this efficiency.

Article in International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health: Group-Based Patterns of Life Satisfaction and Functional Independence over the 10 Years after Traumatic Brain Injury in Older Adults: A Model Systems Study

Less

This paper was our first publication in the Multimodal Technologies and Interaction journal. It was a pleasure to manage the process with our associated editor, who was very active and communicative from the first steps of the submission process until our paper became available. The publication process was fluent and transparent.

Article in Multimodal Technologies and Interaction: Multimodal Approach of Improving Spatial Abilities

Less

It is a pleasure to share our experience with the peer review and publication process of Multimodal Technologies and Interaction. The editors demonstrated exceptional professionalism and provided clear, timely, and supportive communication throughout every stage of the process. The reviewers offered rigorous and relevant suggestions that helped us to improve the scientific article.

Finally, the review process was efficient and fast, reflecting the journal's commitment to quality and author support. The collaboration of the editorial team and their dedication to ensuring the quality of the published work are worth mentioning.

Publishing in Multimodal Technologies and Interaction has been a positive experience, and I would highly recommend this scientific journal to researchers looking for a professional, rigorous, and author-centred publishing platform.

Thank you for this opportunity to reflect on and share our positive experience.

Article in Multimodal Technologies and Interaction: Science Mapping of AI as an Educational Tool Exploring Digital Inequalities: A Sociological Perspective

Less

The process of reviewing scientific papers is extremely important. While certainly not as significant as research and the preparation of papers, researchers must still pay due attention to peer review, and publishers must find a way to properly value it. My experience in this regard with MDPI publications is very positive.

Reviewer of Energies

Less

My experience reviewing for MDPI has been highly positive. The review process is well-structured and efficient, providing clear guidelines and evaluation criteria. The platform is user-friendly, and the editorial team is responsive and supportive. This facilitates a smooth and rewarding review experience, allowing me to contribute meaningfully to the scientific community.

Reviewer of Energies

Less

The reviewing system and process are more convenient for reviewers to review manuscripts and submit comments. Flexibility in submitting revisions is one of the merits of the reviewing process of MDPI.

Reviewer of Energies

Less

There was an extremely efficient and pleasant review process. Comments from the first reviewer were provided well before the revisions had to be made. MDPI also gave 7 days for major revisions, which was very good; it provides deadlines similar to other journals for minor revisions. After acceptance, it was published online within 3 to 5 days, which is quite amazing.

Article in Energies: The Degradation Prediction of Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell Performance Based on a Transformer Model

Less

Publishing in Antioxidants has been a very positive experience. The editors were professional and helpful, and the reviewers were knowledgeable. In addition, the whole process was smooth and rapid, resulting in a noticeable improvement to the paper. I would recommend this journal to anyone considering publishing in this area.

Article in Antioxidants: Oxidative Stress in Genetic Cataract Formation

Less

The entire process of submission, peer review and editing the article ran very smoothly and professionally. The Editors were quick and efficient and the peer reviewers noticed areas of weakness that I had missed in the article and which certainly improved the published version.

Article in Multimodal Technologies and Interaction: Multisensory Technologies for Inclusive Exhibition Spaces: Disability Access Meets Artistic and Curatorial Research

Less

The publishing in Algorithms was really joyful, mostly because of editing assistance. All of the mismatches with the Journal format in draft versions of my paper were clearly highlighted, which made a correcting process smooth and fast. Also all of the reviews of the paper were thoughtful and allowed me to improve its quality.

Article in Algorithms: Not So Robust after All: Evaluating the Robustness of Deep Neural Networks to Unseen Adversarial Attacks

Less

I'll state it in short words: I like reviewing for MDPI because they care about me as a reviewer, offering a reward for my job and giving it value. They care that the review is appropriate, fast, and reliable. They recognise its importance and demonstrate it.

Reviewer of Energies

Less

I am glad to participate in the review process; I review interesting research papers and many of them are outstanding.

Reviewer of Energies

Less

I would like to commend the MDPI Energies editorial team for their professionalism, efficiency and understanding throughout the process of handling our article submission. All our queries and requests were handled promptly and professionally, and this greatly contributed to a very satisfactory publishing experience for us as the authors. I highly recommend the journal to any authors wishing to publish open access.

Article in Energies: Demand-Side Management as a Network Planning Tool: Review of Drivers, Benefits and Opportunities for South Africa

Less

The process for publishing in MDPI is clear, with a high-quality reviewing process and instructions easy to follow.

Article in Energies: A Polynomial Synthesis Approach to Design and Control an LCL-Filter-Based PWM Rectifier with Extended Functions Validated by SIL Simulations

Less

I started posting on MDPI about 5 years ago. I immediately saw the huge difference with other publishing houses–fast and clear deadlines, criteria for accepting manuscripts and a good professional team. In addition, there is a very good and stimulating system of vouchers and bonuses. For this reason, I no longer use other publishers for magazine publications. Very fast manuscript processing and review process. Maximum service and support from the technical team.

Article in Energies: Short-Term Hydro-Thermal-Solar Scheduling with CCGT Based on Self-Adaptive Genetic Algorithm

Less