Compare your shortlisted journals.

Comparing journals is most useful when you look at the same factors for each one rather than reading profiles in isolation. Before deciding between shortlisted titles, consider:

• Aims and scope: whether recent issues actually publish studies like yours, in design as well as topic.
• Article types and limits: word counts, abstract format, and limits on tables, figures and references for the type of paper you are submitting.
• Access model and costs: subscription, hybrid or fully open access, and any article processing charge or waiver policy.
• Indexing: coverage in databases relevant to your field, such as MEDLINE, Scopus or Web of Science.
• Peer-review model: single-anonymous, double-anonymous or open review, and published turnaround times where available.
• Reporting and data policies: required reporting checklists, trial registration, data availability statements and preprint policy.

Metrics such as the Journal Impact Factor, CiteScore or SJR describe the citation pattern of a journal as a whole, not the quality of any single article, and they vary widely between fields. A cardiology journal and a nursing journal with very different impact factors may be equally respected within their disciplines. The San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) recommends against using journal-level metrics as a proxy for the merit of individual papers, and many funders and universities have signed it. Use metrics as one input alongside scope, audience and speed. The Academy article on impact factor and journal selection explains how the figure is calculated.

Speed metrics deserve the same caution. Median time to first decision is often reported across all submissions, including those rejected at desk review within days, so it can understate how long a paper that goes out to reviewers will take.

Profile information can change: journals revise their fees, word limits and policies, and occasionally change publisher or lose indexing. Once you have narrowed the comparison to one or two titles, check the details directly on the journal's own website and in its current author guidelines. Look for a named editorial board with verifiable affiliations, a clear peer-review policy and membership of bodies such as COPE. The guide to identifying predatory journals lists warning signs that a comparison table cannot show.

Many authors rank two or three journals in order before submitting, so that a rejection can be followed quickly by reformatting for the next choice. If the first choice is ambitious, make sure the second and third are realistic fits. When the comparison does not produce a clear answer, or the manuscript sits between disciplines, a journal selection report prepared by a subject specialist weighs the options against your manuscript. To add more titles, return to Journal Finder.

Keep a note of why each journal was ranked where it is. If the first submission is declined, the reasons for the second choice, and any reformatting it requires, are then already recorded.