Annals Author Survey

*1. Compared to other journals you've submitted to, did you find Annals prompt and responsive? 1 - Slow 2 3 - Average 4 5 - Prompt N/A

*2. Did you feel the review process improved your manuscript? 1 - Made it worse 2 3 - Unchanged 4 5 - Improved N/A

*3. Were our communications and reviews courteous, knowledgeable, and helpful to you? 1 - Unhelpful 2 3 - Average 4 5 - Helpful N/A

*4. After this peer review experience at Annals, would you be likely to submit to us again, or recommend us to other researchers? 1 - Never again 2 3 - So-so 4 5 - Very likely N/A

*5. Did you benefit from the comments provided by the peer reviewers? (Does not include comments from the editor). Yes No N/A

*6. Did they suggest any new ideas or new solutions that were not initially in your paper? Yes No N/A

*7. If they did, did you incorporate any of their suggestions into the manuscript? Yes No N/A

*8. Did they identify any errors (other than minor ones like spelling, grammar, etc) in the manuscript? Yes No N/A

*9. Did they misunderstand any major aspect of your manuscript? Yes No N/A

*10. Please rate your assessment of Annals efforts (which are based on ICMJE recommendations) to standardize reporting of authors' potential conflicts of interest. 1 - Inappropriate, excessive, provides no potential benefit in assessing the quality of the research 2 3 4 5 - Reasonable, thoughtful, necessary to help editors and reviewers assess the quality of research

What was the single best part of your peer review experience?

12. What was the worst part of your peer review experience?

13. If your primary specialty is outside EM, please name your specialty:

14. If you normally submit to journals in specialties other than emergency medicine, why did you submit this manuscript to Annals?

15. If your specialty is NOT emergency medicine,what could we do to make it more attractive to you to submit papers to us?

16. Manuscript Number (Please add the manuscript number (eg, 2006-725) of your submission if you are willing. This is not mandatory, and will only be used to anonymously link your feedback so we can identify the editor and reviewers involved in the review of your manuscript for our quality improvement.):