Manuscript Status Meanings: With Editor, Under Review

A submission status tells you who has your paper and what step was last recorded. It does not tell you the decision, and the same label can differ between journals.

Explainer · 9 min read · Directive Publications Editorial Team

A status is a location, not a forecast

Every journal submission system shows a status next to your manuscript. Many authors read it as a clue to the outcome. It isn't one. It records the last workflow step logged in the system and tells you, roughly, who holds the paper: the editorial office, an editor, reviewers, or you.

Two facts matter here.

1. Labels vary between journals. Elsevier's guide to Editorial Manager statuses says that "Each journal is able to customize the wording of the status terms, but the same status phases apply to all journals using Editorial Manager." ScholarOne journals configure their own workflows too.
2. Statuses are not strictly one-way. The same guide says a submission "can skip a phase, or return back to an earlier phase, depending on Editor actions."

So first find your journal's own explanation, usually in its author instructions or the publisher's help pages. The definitions below describe common patterns, not your journal's wording.

Editorial Manager statuses, step by step

Editorial Manager is used by many medical journals, including Elsevier's. The table follows Elsevier's definitions and adds what each status means for you.

Three of these statuses cause most of the confusion.

With Editor

Elsevier's definition is broader than most authors assume. The editor "may be reading and assessing the submission, assigning additional editors according to the journal's polices, or taking some other action outside of the system." Only a step recorded in the system moves it on, and sending reviewer invitations is the typical one.

So With Editor covers the editor's first assessment, where desk decisions are made, and any time spent identifying reviewers. A long stay tells you the next step has not been recorded, not which way the paper is heading.

Under Review

Under Review starts when reviewers are invited, not when they start reading. Elsevier notes that it "encompasses many steps; while it may appear your manuscript is not progressing through the editorial process, a lot of activities may be happening during this part of the review process." Those steps include waiting for invited reviewers to accept or decline, inviting replacements, and waiting for reports. How long the stage lasts depends above all, in Elsevier's account, on whether referees are free to take the work.

Required Reviews Completed and Decision in Process

Required Reviews Completed means the journal's target number of reviews has arrived and the handling editor is weighing them. Decision in Process means an editor has started a decision in the system. Neither status reveals the decision. Elsevier adds that in some journals the decision "may need to be confirmed by multiple Editors", and that editors can still seek more reviews or assign another editor at either stage, which moves the status back to an earlier one. You learn the outcome from the decision email, which Elsevier says includes the decision, the editor and reviewer comments, and further instructions.

ScholarOne statuses: the Awaiting labels

Journals on ScholarOne Manuscripts often show statuses that begin with "Awaiting", naming the step the paper is waiting for. Floresta e Ambiente, a journal that uses ScholarOne, publishes a clear set of definitions in its author instructions:

The last row shows why you should not borrow another journal's definitions. At Floresta e Ambiente, Awaiting EIC Decision "is shown for all articles that have not yet received the final decision, regardless of the evaluation phase." At a journal configured differently, the same words might appear only at the end. Read your journal's own explanation before you read meaning into the label.

How the two systems line up

If you are used to one system and submit to a journal on the other, this rough mapping helps. Equivalents are approximate, and your journal's labels may differ.

Note the two Editorial Manager rows labelled Under Review. Editorial Manager shows one status for a stretch that ScholarOne often splits in two, so a ScholarOne author may see more movement for the same underlying progress.

Reading status changes: backwards, skipped and stuck

Movement often tells you more than the label.

• Backwards before reviewers agree. At Floresta e Ambiente, a reviewer declining an invitation can move the paper from Awaiting Reviewer Assignment back to Awaiting Reviewer Selection while the editor finds someone else. Repeated moves like this suggest the editor is struggling to find available reviewers.
• A skipped review stage. If an Editorial Manager submission moves from With Editor to Decision in Process without passing through Under Review, the editor is deciding without external review. That is how desk rejections happen, but wait for the letter rather than assuming.
• No change for a long time. Under Review and Awaiting Reviewer Scores can stay static while invitations, declines and reminders happen behind them. Judge the wait against the journal's own timeline, not against the label.
• Revisions repeat the cycle. After you resubmit, the revised version passes through statuses again. In Editorial Manager it appears under Revisions Being Processed in your author menu, and it can go back to the reviewers or be checked by the editor alone. Our guide to journal decision letters explains what usually happens to each kind of revision.

Note each change and the date you saw it. Those notes are what you will quote if you later ask the journal about progress.

Which statuses need action from you

Most statuses mean you wait. A few mean the journal is waiting for you, and missing them costs time. Check your author menu for these:

1. Incomplete. The submission or revision is not finished. Elsevier's guidance says new submissions left Incomplete for more than 90 days are removed in its Editorial Manager journals.
2. Needs Approval or Revision Needs Approval. The paper does not move until you approve the built PDF.
3. Sent Back to Author. The editorial team wants changes before review. The email lists them; fix every item and resubmit promptly.
4. Revise. The status stays until you start your revision, and the deadline is in the decision letter.
5. Transfer Pending. The editor has suggested another journal and needs your answer. Our guide to manuscript transfers between journals explains what you are agreeing to.

When a status justifies an inquiry

The label itself is rarely the trigger for writing to the journal; the length of the wait is. Our guide to how long peer review takes covers how to estimate a journal's timeline, when a question is reasonable, and a template you can adapt. The ICMJE Recommendations expect journals to answer authors' status questions promptly, so asking is legitimate.

When you do write, give the manuscript number, the exact status label as your journal shows it, and the date it last changed, taken from your notes.

Two things to avoid while you wait. Do not contact anyone you suspect is reviewing your paper, and do not submit the same manuscript to a second journal. If you decide to move on, withdraw formally first.

Read the status, then read the journal's own words

Status labels compress a multi-person process into a few words, and each journal chooses its own. Use them to answer one question: who has the paper now, and is it waiting for you? If it is with someone else, keep your log, check the journal's timeline, and prepare for the decision rather than decoding the label.

Directive Publications sets out each stage of its peer review process, and its guidance for authors explains what to prepare before you submit.