What We Did Today: Building a Journal Shortlist for a Research Manuscript

Searching for journals turns up dozens of titles that look relevant. A broad subject match does not make a good fit. The candidates differed in scope, accepted article types, readership, indexing, publication model, article processing charge and submission requirements, and a wrong choice risks desk rejection and a lost submission cycle [2, 3, 4].

So the question in choosing a journal for publication was not “which journals could publish this?” but “which journals fit this manuscript best, and why?”

We first extracted the manuscript’s research problem, study design, article type, objectives, methods and intended readers. Requirements change with the article type, whether original research, systematic review, case report or protocol [1, 6]. That profile became the yardstick for every journal.

We read the aims and scope of each candidate against the research question and checked whether the journal publishes the article type. Belonging to the broad field was not enough: the manuscript had to matter to that journal’s readers [2]. Journals with weak scope alignment were dropped at this stage. Our guide to aligning a manuscript with journal guidelines covers this check in more detail.

Using one set of criteria made the comparison structured and repeatable. For the publication model and APC we relied on each journal’s own stated information rather than assumptions, and we checked transparency against the COPE, DOAJ, OASPA and WAME principles to rule out predatory journals {c(5)}.

Impact factor and other metrics are useful, but a higher metric does not make a journal the right choice for a particular paper [2]. A well-known journal may have weak scope alignment or rarely publish the relevant article type. We read metrics alongside scope, readership, indexing, model, cost and recent output. See our explainer on journal quartiles for how to read them.

We reviewed recent articles in each remaining journal for similar topics, designs and article types. This separated journals that fit in theory from those that show a practical fit through what they actually publish [3].

The output was not a list of names but a shortlist with a recorded reason for each journal, and a clear order of submission. That reduces guesswork and avoids sending the paper to journals unlikely to take it.

What we learned: journal selection is part of the publication strategy, not an administrative task left to the last day. The strongest choice is the journal where the manuscript has a clear and defensible fit {c(2, 6)}.