Nature Communications 'Under Consideration': What It Means and How Long It Takes
If your Nature Communications submission shows Under Consideration, the label alone does not establish whether it is with editors or reviewers. Here's what you can verify.
While you wait
Waiting on Nature Communications? Get your next move ready.
The Nature Communications wait is out of your hands; the next move isn't. Scan your next manuscript free, or run this paper through the scan to see what reviewers typically push back on, so the revision response is ready when the decision lands.
Nature Communications review timeline: what the data shows
Time to first decision is the most actionable number. What happens after varies by manuscript and reviewer availability.
What shapes the timeline
- Desk decisions are fast. Scope problems surface within days.
- Reviewer availability is the main variable after triage. Specialized topics take longer to assign.
- Revision rounds reset the clock. Major revision typically adds 6-12 weeks per round.
What to do while waiting
- Track status in the submission portal, status changes signal active review.
- Wait at least the journal's stated median before sending a status inquiry.
- Prepare revision materials in parallel if you expect a revise-and-resubmit decision.
Quick answer: “Under Consideration” is not proof that your Nature Communications paper is with external reviewers, nor is it a hidden acceptance or rejection signal. The journal says a primary editor evaluates new submissions and that the corresponding author is notified by email when the editor decides to send a paper for review. Check that message and your submission record before drawing a conclusion from the portal label. Nature Communications' editorial process is the authoritative description.
Nature Communications reports a 9-day median for submission to first editorial decision in its 2025 metrics. That describes all manuscripts in the reported measure, not a deadline for yours. A manuscript still under consideration after day 14 has not “almost certainly” passed the desk screen; the previous version of this guide made that unsupported inference.
If the wait gives you time to prepare a possible revision, check manuscript readiness. Manusights cannot read your journal's private workflow or predict the decision.
What you can and cannot learn from the status
Evidence you have | What it supports | What it does not prove |
|---|---|---|
“Under Consideration” in the portal | The submission is still being handled by the journal | That external review began, that a decision is imminent, or that the paper is likely to be accepted |
Email saying the editor sent the paper for review | An explicit editorial decision to seek external review | That reviewers have accepted invitations or when reports will arrive |
No decision after the published 9-day median | Your paper took longer than the midpoint of the journal-wide first-decision distribution | That it cleared a particular stage |
A revision request or decision letter | The next action and any deadline stated by your editor | A guarantee of eventual acceptance |
If the letter is a revision request, Nature Communications major revision guidance explains how the returning referees read the revised paper.
Sources: Nature Communications editorial process and 2025 journal metrics, checked October 8, 2026. The interpretations in the last column are Manusights' caution against overreading the evidence.
The label alone is a poor clock. An editor may be assessing scope, consulting colleagues, or seeking external advice; those steps do not have a guaranteed public status or duration. The publisher describes the editorial pathway, but does not publish a rule that a particular number of days under this label means peer review has started.
How the journal describes its actual process
At initial submission, a primary editor reads the manuscript and consults other editors. The editor considers novelty, scope, conceptual or methodological advance, and likely interest to the journal's readership. Manuscripts that meet those criteria are sent to external referees. The journal says it emails the corresponding author when that decision is made. Read the publisher's process.
If reports arrive, the editor considers the paper's current quality and what it could become after revision. The decision may ask for a revision, reject with potential interest in a later resubmission, or reject without such an invitation. The decision letter, not a portal-duration rule, tells you what to do. Invited revisions use the link in that letter; they should not be uploaded as new manuscripts.
The separate Nature Communications submission guide covers journal fit and preparation. This page owns the narrower question of what the “Under Consideration” status can establish.
How to read the timing data without misleading yourself
Published 2025 metric | What it measures | What not to infer |
|---|---|---|
9 days, median submission to first editorial decision | Time until the journal decides whether a submission is sent for formal review or not | A nine-day guarantee, or the time required for peer review |
242 days, median submission to acceptance | Time from submission to acceptance among papers that reach acceptance | The likely wait for every submitted manuscript |
Source: Nature Communications journal metrics, 2025 data, checked October 8, 2026.
Nature Communications does not publish a desk-rejection or acceptance percentage in the cited metrics. We will not infer one from the timing numbers. A median also cannot tell you whether silence is good news; it summarizes a distribution rather than predicting your case.
What to do while you wait
- Check the submission system and the corresponding author's email, including any editorial decision or review-notification message. Only the journal can confirm the current stage.
- Keep the submitted version and any related-work disclosure available. Nature Communications' submission instructions explain how authors can check manuscript status.
- If the journal has given you a specific deadline, use that rather than a generic online timeline. If you need clarification, send a brief inquiry through the official journal route with the manuscript number and submission date. Do not treat the absence of a reply within an invented two-business-day window as a new status signal.
- If you receive a revision request, read its instructions before changing files. The editor's letter governs scope, response format, and timing. The Nature Communications response-to-reviewers guide can help organize the work without assuming the decision was positive.
Avoid resubmitting the paper elsewhere solely because the status has lasted two weeks. Equally, do not spend money or commit to a publication announcement on the theory that silence predicts acceptance.
For a manuscript-specific preparation check while waiting, review the submission's evidence and framing. This checks your materials, not Nature Communications' queue.
Readiness check
While you wait on Nature Communications, scan your next manuscript.
The scan takes about 2 to 3 minutes. Use the result to decide whether to revise before the decision comes back.
Official sources
- Nature Communications editorial process, including initial assessment, review notification, and revision handling; checked October 8, 2026.
- Nature Communications journal metrics, 2025 first-decision and submission-to-acceptance medians; checked October 8, 2026.
- Nature Communications how to submit, submission system and status access; checked October 8, 2026.
Frequently asked questions
It means the submission remains in the journal's process, but the label by itself does not confirm external peer review or predict a decision. Nature Communications says it emails the corresponding author when an editor decides to send a paper to reviewers.
Nature Communications reports a 2025 median of 9 days from submission to the first editorial decision about whether to send a paper for review. A median is a journal-wide statistic, not a deadline or a forecast for one manuscript.
No. Elapsed time alone cannot establish that external reviewers have been invited. Check the journal's correspondence and submission record; the journal says it notifies the corresponding author by email when the paper is sent for review.
No. The journal's 2025 median of 242 days measures submission to acceptance, not the wait for every submission or the time to a first decision. It should not be used to forecast your own result.
The journal publishes no universal 8-week waiting rule for this status. Check recent emails and the submission system first. If you need clarification or a stated deadline has passed, send a concise inquiry with the manuscript number and submission date through the journal's official contact route.
Free guide
Waiting is not the same as being ignored, and there is a way to tell.
Reviewers usually get ten days. When it has been months, an appeal and a complaint are different instruments with different addresses, and only one of them fits a delay. This is which to use, and the wording that gets an answer.
Final step
Done interpreting the status? Put the wait to work.
The Nature Communications decision will arrive on the journal's clock. What you control is what's next: scan your next manuscript free, or run this paper through the scan so the likely reviewer pushback is mapped before the revision request lands.
Free scan, no card needed.
Target journal Nature Communications
Private API processing. Your manuscript is not used to train models.
Re-read the status guidePut the guidance to work
Turn a decision into a clear next step.
Use the practical response workflow when a manuscript needs revision, or the process guide when you need to understand what the editorial status means.
Where to go next
Start here
Same journal, next question
- Nature Communications Review Timeline: Desk Decision to Final Decision
- Nature Communications Submission Process: What Happens After You Upload
- How to Avoid Desk Rejection at Nature Communications (2026)
- Is Nature Communications a Good Journal? A Practical Fit Verdict for Authors
- Nature Communications Response to Reviewers: How to Write a Rebuttal That Wins (2026)
- Nature Communications 'With Editor': The Desk-Screen Stage Explained