Science Advances Submission Process: Complete Timeline & What to Expect

Decision cue: If you need a yes/no submission call today, compare your draft with 3 recent accepted papers from this journal and only submit when scope, methods depth, and claim strength line up.

Related: How to choose a journal • How to avoid desk rejection • Pre-submission checklist

The Science Advances submission process is faster than most high-impact journals, but that speed comes with stricter initial screening. If you're preparing to submit, here's what happens at each stage and how long it'll take.

For the full Science Advances overview including impact factor trends and acceptance rate data, see our Science Advances journal guide.

Submission Timeline (Typical)

Here's the realistic timeline for Science Advances:

• Initial screening: 3-5 days (desk rejection happens here)
• Editor assignment: 1-2 days
• Reviewer invitation: 5-10 days (hardest part)
• First review: 14-21 days from submission
• Revision period: Author's timeline (usually 30-60 days)
• Final decision: 7-14 days after resubmission

Total time to first decision: 21-28 days on average. That's solid for a journal with IF 12.5 (2024).

What Happens After You Submit

Day 1-5: Editorial Screening

Your paper hits the editorial team's queue. They're checking:

1. Scope fit - Does it advance a field significantly?
2. Technical quality - Sound methods, appropriate controls?
3. Impact potential - Will other researchers cite this?
4. Presentation - Clear figures, logical flow?

Desk rejection rate: ~40%. Most happen within 3 days. If you make it past day 5, you're probably going to review.

Day 5-7: Editor Assignment

If you pass screening, an associate editor with expertise in your field gets assigned. They'll read your paper more carefully and decide whether it's worth sending to reviewers.

This is where strong cover letters matter. Don't rehash your abstract. Explain why this work is important NOW and who'll care about it.

Day 7-17: Finding Reviewers

This is the bottleneck. Science Advances uses 2-3 reviewers per paper. Finding willing experts takes time because:

• Top researchers get 50+ review requests per year
• Your niche might have limited reviewers
• Competing journals are also recruiting

Editors typically invite 6-8 people to get 2-3 acceptances.

Day 17-28: Peer Review

Once reviewers accept, they get 14 days to submit reports. Most finish around day 10-12. The editor reads all reports, adds their own assessment, and sends you a decision.

Decision breakdown:

• Accept: <5% (rare on first submission)
• Major revision: 30-40% (you're probably getting published)
• Minor revision: 10-15% (almost certain acceptance)
• Reject: 45-55% (but often with encouragement to submit elsewhere)

How to Improve Your Chances

1. Nail the Significance Statement

Science Advances requires a 120-word significance statement. This isn't a summary. It's your pitch for why anyone should care.

Bad example: "We studied X and found Y."

Good example: "This work explains why [major problem] happens and shows how to fix it with [specific approach]."

The editors read this first. Make it count.

2. Format Figures Correctly

Science Advances is picky about figures:

• Main text: 6 figures max
• Each panel needs a label (A, B, C)
• High resolution (300 dpi minimum)
• Color-blind friendly palettes

If your figures need work, they'll send you back to fix them. That adds 5-10 days.

3. Check Your References

They want 40-50 references for a typical research article. Too few = superficial literature review. Too many = you didn't curate.

Avoid self-citation clusters. 2-3 of your own papers is fine. Eight looks desperate.

4. Write a Strong Cover Letter

Don't waste the editor's time with flattery. They know Science Advances is good.

Cover what matters:

• One sentence: what you found
• One sentence: why it's significant
• One sentence: who'll benefit from this work
• Suggested reviewers (3-5 names with emails)

That's it. 200 words max.

What If You Get Desk Rejected?

Desk rejection stings, but it's not personal. Science Advances rejects 40% of submissions before review. Common reasons:

1. Scope mismatch - Incremental advance, not a major breakthrough
2. Methods concerns - Controls missing, sample size too small
3. Presentation issues - Figures unclear, writing confusing
4. Impact uncertainty - Cool work, but niche audience

What to do:

• Read the decision letter carefully (they usually explain why)
• Don't resubmit the same paper (they'll remember)
• Consider PLOS ONE, Scientific Reports, or field-specific journals
• If methods were the issue, strengthen those before trying elsewhere

Revision Strategy

If you get major revision, you're most of the way to acceptance. Don't mess it up by:

• Ignoring reviewer comments (even stupid ones deserve a response)
• Submitting late (you asked for this timeline, stick to it)
• Adding new data without explaining why

Response letter structure:

1. Thank the reviewers (one sentence)
2. Address each comment point-by-point
3. Show exactly what you changed (line numbers help)
4. Explain why you didn't make certain changes (if applicable)

If a reviewer wants experiment X but you don't have time/resources, explain why the existing data already answers their question.

Common Mistakes That Slow You Down

1. Incomplete Submissions

Missing:

• Author contribution statements
• Data availability statements
• Competing interests declarations
• Supplementary file formatting

Each missing piece adds 2-3 days while they wait for you to fix it.

2. Unclear Author Order

If co-first authors or co-corresponding authors aren't marked correctly in the system, the editors will ask you to clarify. That's another delay.

3. Poor File Organization

Science Advances wants:

• Main text (Word or LaTeX)
• Figures (separate files, not embedded)
• Supplementary materials (one PDF)

If you upload everything in one giant PDF, they'll send it back.

Should You Get Pre-Submission Review?

Here's when it makes sense:

Yes, if:

• This is your first Science Advances submission
• You've had recent desk rejections from other high-impact journals
• Your figures/writing need work but you're not sure what's wrong
• You're uncertain whether your scope fits

No, if:

• You've published in Science Advances before
• Your PI has a track record with this journal
• Your methods are bulletproof and results are clear

Pre-submission review catches the issues that cause desk rejection. For Science Advances, that's especially valuable because their screening is strict.

After Acceptance

Once accepted, you'll handle:

• Copyright transfer
• Open access fees ($5,500 as of 2026)
• Final proofs review
• Press release coordination (if applicable)

Publication happens 2-4 weeks after acceptance. Total time from submission to publication: 3-5 months typically.

For specific help on writing the discussion section, see our discussion section guide.

Sources and further reading

Impact factor data sourced from Clarivate Journal Citation Reports (released June 2025). Submission guidelines at the Science Advances information for authors.

See our full Science Advances journal guide for acceptance rates, review timelines, and editorial scope.

What the Under Evaluation Status Means

"Under evaluation" at Science Advances means the paper has cleared the initial desk screen and an editor is assessing it for peer review. This is a good sign , roughly ~40% of submissions get desk-rejected before reaching this stage.

The wait from "under evaluation" to a peer review decision is typically 4-8 weeks once reviewers are confirmed. If the status stays at "under evaluation" for more than 3-4 weeks without moving to "under review," the editor is still working on reviewer recruitment. That's normal and doesn't signal a problem with your paper.

Handling a Desk Rejection at Science Advances

If your paper is desk-rejected at Science Advances, the editor typically provides a brief explanation. The most common reasons: scope doesn't fit the multidisciplinary focus, the novelty isn't at the level Science Advances publishes, or the paper is a better fit for a more specialized journal.

A desk rejection isn't a judgment that the science is poor , it's a scope and significance call. Read the editor's reason carefully, decide whether the feedback suggests a revision (unusual for desk rejections) or a redirect to a different journal, and move forward. Most desk-rejected papers find a good home at a more specialized journal without changes to the core science.

The fastest path through the Science Advances process is a paper with a clean scope claim, a well-constructed abstract that communicates the significance to a non-specialist reader, and a methods section that's complete and transparent. Those three factors are the difference between clearing the desk and being redirected in the first week. Everything after that , the peer review, the revision, the final decision , follows from getting the initial submission right.

The Bottom Line

Science Advances' 21-28 day timeline is only useful if you make it through the initial desk screening. The ~40% desk rejection rate in the first five days is driven by scope mismatches and weak abstract framing. Fix those before you submit and the rest of the process handles itself.

See also

• Is Science Advances a good journal?
• Nature Communications vs Science Advances
• JCI Submission Guide: Process & Timeline

More Submission Resources

• Acceptance rates across 50+ biomedical journals
• Review timelines compared
• Browse journals by field - find the best fit for your research area
• Nature vs Science: which journal?

Related Resources

• Acceptance rates for 50+ journals
• Nature Communications vs Science Advances
• Is Science Advances a good journal?

• Review timelines compared