Bioinformatics (OUP) 'Under Review': What Each Status Means

Before the paper reaches external reviewers, the Bioinformatics office performs pre-screening returning less-significant papers without review, then the associate editor evaluates remaining papers for further peer review. About 40 to 50 percent of submissions are rejected at the pre-screening + associate editor desk-screen stage within 1 to 3 weeks. A pre-screening return most often means the handling editor concluded that the work is of less significance to the bioinformatics readership. A desk rejection by the associate editor most often means the work would fit better at a sister OUP journal (Bioinformatics Advances for shorter-format, Briefings in Bioinformatics for reviews, Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics for genomics) or that the bioinformatics significance bar is not met.

The Bioinformatics editorial office confirms files are complete: manuscript with figures embedded, Supporting Information with software/database documentation (for software/database papers), benchmark results on standardized datasets (for methodology papers), OUP template formatting, cover letter directed to the editor naming the bioinformatics contribution, conflict-of-interest declarations, ethics-statement documentation, and data-availability statement (code repository link required for software papers).

The Bioinformatics office handling editor reads the paper and evaluates significance to the bioinformatics readership. Papers that are considered to be of less significance to the readership of the journal are returned without review.

Papers that pass pre-screening are assigned to an associate editor in the appropriate subspecialty. The associate editor evaluates bioinformatics significance, methodology rigor, software/database utility (for software/database papers), and Bioinformatics subspecialty routing.

In parallel with the pre-screening or associate editor's primary read, ambiguous-fit papers are discussed across the OUP Bioinformatics editorial team where peer associate editors weigh in on whether the paper would fit better at Bioinformatics flagship or at sister OUP journals. This editorial consultation runs alongside the desk-screen and adds 3 to 7 days to the timeline that is invisible to the author in the portal.

Bioinformatics associate editors typically invite 2 to 3 external reviewers, with reviewer recruitment typically taking 7 to 14 days. The recruitment window can take longer because reviewers with topic-matched bioinformatics subspecialty expertise (especially across sequence analysis, genome analysis, systems biology, and machine learning subspecialties) are scarce.

Once 2 to 3 reviewers agree to review, the typical Bioinformatics peer-review cycle lasts 4 to 8 weeks per reviewer, contributing to the 6 to 10 week post-screen first-decision window. Reviewers are asked to evaluate bioinformatics significance, methodology rigor, software/database utility, benchmark adequacy, and reproducibility. Reviewer reports for Bioinformatics tend to be focused; 1500 to 3000 word reports are typical.

After reports return, the associate editor synthesizes them. Publication occurs 1 to 3 weeks after acceptance (fast OUP publication). Total submission-to-acceptance commonly runs 3 to 6 months for successful papers, including revision rounds.

• Pre-screening return within 1 to 14 days: Bioinformatics office return for papers of less significance to readership.
• Rejection within 14 to 21 days: Associate editor desk rejection.
• Still Under Review after 3 weeks: Strong signal. Paper passed the Bioinformatics pre-screening and associate editor desk screen.
• Still Under Review after 10 weeks: Reviewer-recruitment or reviewer-report delay. A polite inquiry via the OUP ScholarOne portal is appropriate.
• Status changes to "Decision Pending": Reports are in; expect a decision within 1 week.

This is the most common anxiety we hear from Bioinformatics authors during the active editorial window. The honest answer: no, 6 weeks at Under Review puts you in the normal middle of Bioinformatics's 6 to 10 week post-screen first-decision distribution. Reports may already be in editorial synthesis with the associate editor preparing the recommendation. Most reviewer-driven delays come from reviewer-recruitment timing for bioinformatics subspecialty experts rather than slow reviews. If the portal still says Under Review at the 9-week mark, the most likely explanation is that one of the assigned reviewers asked for an extension and the associate editor granted it. This is normal practice at Bioinformatics.

What you should NOT do during the 6-to-9-week window is email the editorial office. Bioinformatics associate editors are working academic bioinformaticians managing 40+ active papers per year around their own laboratories; an inquiry at 6 weeks adds friction without accelerating the timeline.

If your Bioinformatics paper is rejected after review, the natural cascade depends on what the reviewers and associate editor cited:

Bioinformatics Advances is the natural OUP open-access shorter-format cascade for bioinformatics. OUP supports manuscript-transfer with reviewer reports preserved.

Briefings in Bioinformatics is the OUP review-format cascade.

Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics is the OUP cascade for genomics-focused bioinformatics.

Bioinformatics's sister Nucleic Acids Research is the OUP cascade for nucleic-acid-focused bioinformatics.

BMC Bioinformatics is the external BMC bioinformatics cascade. BMC uses Editorial Manager at editorialmanager.com/bmcbioinformatics; editorial contact bmcbioinformatics@biomedcentral.com.

Genome Biology is the external BMC genomics cascade for top-tier genomics methodology.

PLOS Computational Biology is the external PLOS computational biology cascade. PLOS uses Editorial Manager at editorialmanager.com/pcompbiol; editorial contact ploscompbiol@plos.org.

OUP asks reviewers at Bioinformatics to evaluate four things specifically. The table below maps each to actionable preparation.

In our pre-submission work with Bioinformatics-targeted manuscripts, three named patterns generate the most consistent reviewer concerns and the most common reasons papers miss the editorial bar or fail the pre-screening.

Insufficient reader significance flagged at pre-screening. When the work is of less significance to the bioinformatics readership (especially application papers without methodology innovation or software/database papers without broad utility demonstration), Bioinformatics pre-screening return within 1 to 3 weeks is common. The strongest manuscripts frame the bioinformatics significance for the broad bioinformatics readership.

Benchmark coverage gaps flagged as reviewer concerns. When methodology papers do not include standardized benchmark comparisons against current state-of-the-art, reviewers consistently request additional benchmarks. The strongest manuscripts include comprehensive benchmark coverage from the start.

OUP bioinformatics cascade offers from associate editor. When the associate editor concludes the work is rigorous but the Bioinformatics significance bar is not met, transfer offers to Bioinformatics Advances (open-access shorter-format), Briefings in Bioinformatics (reviews), or Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics (genomics-focused) are common. OUP editors take these transfers seriously.

This page was created from OUP's public Bioinformatics author guidelines at academic.oup.com/bioinformatics/pages/author-guidelines, OUP Bioinformatics instructions for authors (pre-screening process returning less-significant papers without review, associate editor + reviewer model, ~30 percent acceptance rate, 1 to 3 weeks publication after acceptance), and Manusights pre-submission review experience with Bioinformatics-targeted manuscripts.

For the OUP bioinformatics landscape beyond Bioinformatics, see Bioinformatics Advances (open-access shorter-format), Briefings in Bioinformatics (reviews), Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics (genomics-focused), Nucleic Acids Research (nucleic-acid-focused bioinformatics), and external bioinformatics alternatives (BMC Bioinformatics, Genome Biology, PLOS Computational Biology). The choice across these titles depends on whether the central contribution is top OUP bioinformatics (Bioinformatics), OUP open-access bioinformatics (Bioinformatics Advances), bioinformatics review (Briefings in Bioinformatics), genomics-focused (Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics), nucleic-acid bioinformatics (NAR), BMC bioinformatics (BMC Bioinformatics), top-tier genomics methodology (Genome Biology), or PLOS computational biology (PLOS Computational Biology).

Reviewers at Bioinformatics typically draw from 2 to 3 bioinformatics subspecialty experts under the OUP single-blind model. Editors screen and triage manuscripts before any reviewer sees them via the pre-screening + associate editor desk screens, and preparing a response template that addresses both bioinformatics significance and methodology rigor accelerates revision rounds substantially.

For a pre-upload check of your manuscript against the Bioinformatics bioinformatics-significance-plus-utility bar before submission, our Bioinformatics pre-submission diagnostic flags the significance and benchmark weaknesses most likely to surface in the pre-screening + associate editor desk screens.