Free readiness scan for PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences).
Methods and core-science issues came up on 38 of the 57 manuscripts aimed at PNAS that our scan read since August. Across all scans in those weeks it was 49%.
Upload your manuscript and see the first desk-rejection risks, journal-fit signals, and top reviewer objections calibrated for PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) in about 2 to 3 minutes.
Impact factor
9.5
Acceptance
13% of direct submissions (2025)
First decision
10 days to first decision; 45 days after review (2025)
Private API processing. Your manuscript is not used to train models.
Time-bounded manuscript storage. Your manuscript is not used for training.
Start free preview
Get a fast submission-risk check
Calibrated on 5,000+ pre-submission reviews. Readiness, desk-screen risk, and the top blockers in about 2 to 3 minutes.
Free manuscript scan · Full report from $39
From our scan history
What our scan most often flags for manuscripts aimed at PNAS
57 manuscripts named PNAS as their target between August 2026 and 7 October 2026. We counted each author once, using their latest scan, and grouped the issues the way the free preview groups them.
Claim scope and support
46 of 57 (81%)
Ranked first on 18 · all scans 90%
Methods and core science
38 of 57 (67%)
Ranked first on 24 · all scans 49%
Target journal fit
14 of 57 (25%)
Ranked first on 14 · all scans 25%
Statistical confidence and reporting
3 of 57 (5%)
Ranked first on 0 · all scans 4%
Structure and submission package
3 of 57 (5%)
Ranked first on 1 · all scans 6%
Desk-rejection risk, as the scan rated it
high
7 of 57
all scans 11%
medium
42 of 57
all scans 36%
low
8 of 57
all scans 53%
PNAS manuscripts sit in the middle on triage. The scan rated desk-rejection risk medium for 42 of the 57 (74%), high for 7 and low for 8. Across all scans, medium was 36%.
Fit was rarely the problem. It came up on 14 of the 57 (25%), the same rate as everywhere else. The weight fell on the science itself: methods and core-science issues were the top-ranked flag for 24 of the 57 (42%), ahead of claim scope (18) and fit (14).
So the useful question before a PNAS submission is narrower than "is this big enough". It is whether the methods section answers the obvious challenge to the main result.
Counts come from the free scan's own ratings, not from journal decisions. "All scans" is every manuscript the scan read in the same weeks, whatever its target (2,349 authors). Scans from before the preview grouped issues this way are left out.
Common questions about PNAS submissions
What does the scan flag most often on manuscripts aimed at PNAS?
Claim scope on 81% of them and methods or core science on 67%. Methods issues were the top-ranked flag on 24 of 57, more than any other kind. Fit came up on 25%, no more often than for other journals.
What does a medium desk-rejection rating for PNAS mean?
The rating is the scan's estimate of triage risk against PNAS, not a prediction of the editors' decision, and we have not checked it against outcomes. It landed on medium for 42 of 57 manuscripts, against 36% of all scans. High was rare (7) and so was low (8).
Where can I read more about PNAS?
See the full PNAS submission guide for scope details, insider tips, and acceptance-rate context. Or see how the Full Review works across all journals.
Find out before PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)'s editors do
Your reviewers will find these issues. The question is whether you find them first. Free preview in about 2 to 3 minutes.
Start the free PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) scan