Journal Database

At the editorial and peer review stages, animal methods bias may result in a lengthy revision period or, ultimately, rejection if authors fail to comply with requests for animal experiments. To help minimize these undesirable outcomes, the COLAAB has compiled a database of journals with a track record of publishing nonanimal studies for consideration upon submission. Submitting to an appropriate journal may not guarantee a total avoidance of the effects of animal methods bias, but it can reduce them. Choosing the right journal is also important for maximizing a study’s reach and impact.

To determine if a journal is the right fit, it is important to check that the study fits within its scope, and recent issues should also be checked for articles that contain similar methodology as the study ready for submission. Considering the journal’s audience is also crucial to this decision. Other compelling journal characteristics may also be considered, such as open access, open peer review, and the likelihood of the journal to accept negative results. (For more details on open peer review, see the text below the database.)

In addition to the database below, the following journal selectors can help determine an appropriate set of journals for a manuscript based on its abstract:

SciRev is another valuable web resource in which authors share their experiences with specific journals’ review processes and can provide insight as to whether a particular journal may be a good fit for a given manuscript.

Impact Factor
Title Publisher Impact factor Open access Open peer review ARRIVE guidelines URL
Journal of Biotechnology Elsevier 4.1 Yes No No https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/journal-of-biotechnology
Journal of Orthopedic Research Wiley 2.8 Yes No Yes https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/1554527x
Journal of Translational Medicine Springer Nature 7.4 Yes Yes Yes https://translational-medicine.biomedcentral.com/
Lab on a Chip Royal Society of Chemistry 6.1 Yes Yes No https://www.rsc.org/journals-books-databases/about-journals/lab-on-a-chip/
Life MDPI 3.2 Yes No Yes https://www.mdpi.com/journal/life
Materials Today Bio Elsevier 8.7 Yes No Yes https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/materials-today-bio
Med Cell Press 12.8 Yes No No https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/med
Micro and Nano Engineering Elsevier 2.4 Yes No Yes https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/micro-and-nano-engineering
Microfluidics and Nanofluidics Springer Nature 2.8 Yes No No https://link.springer.com/journal/10404
Micromachines MDPI 3.4 Yes No Yes https://www.mdpi.com/journal/micromachines
Molecules MDPI 4.6 Yes No Yes https://www.mdpi.com/journal/molecules
Nanomaterials MDPI 5.3 Yes No Yes https://www.mdpi.com/journal/nanomaterials
Nanotechnology IOP Publishing 2.9 Yes No No https://iopscience.iop.org/journal/0957-4484
Nature Biomedical Engineering Nature 26.8 Yes No No https://www.nature.com/natbiomedeng/
Nature Communications Nature 17.7 Yes No No https://www.nature.com/ncomms/
Nature Nanotechnology Nature 38.3 Yes No No https://www.nature.com/nnano/
Nature Reviews Rheumatology Nature 20.5 Yes No No https://www.nature.com/nrrheum/
Neurotoxicology and Teratology Elsevier 2.9 Yes No Yes https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/neurotoxicology-and-teratology
Nuclear Medicine and Biology Elsevier 3.1 Yes No Yes https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/nuclear-medicine-and-biology
PeerJ PeerJ 2.7 Yes Yes No https://peerj.com/
Polymers MDPI 5.0 Yes No Yes https://www.mdpi.com/journal/polymers
Process Biochemistry Elsevier 4.4 Yes No Yes https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/process-biochemistry
Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology : RTP Elsevier/International Society of Toxicology & Pharmacology 3.4 Yes No Yes https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/regulatory-toxicology-and-pharmacology
Science AAAS 56.9 Yes No No https://www.science.org/
Science Translational Medicine Science 17.1 No No No https://www.science.org/journal/stm

A Note on Open Peer Review

Open peer review can refer to various aspects of the peer review process, including (1) open identities, when authors and reviewers are aware of each other’s identities; (2) open reports, when review reports are published with the final manuscript; (3) open participation, when the wider community can contribute to the review; or (4) open pre-review manuscripts, when manuscripts are made immediately available (for example, through preprint servers like bioRxiv) ahead of journal peer review. Among other benefits, open peer review may improve the quality, transparency, and reproducibility of research, and it may prevent or mitigate biases, including animal methods bias. Improving academic publishing and the peer review process is a hotly contested issue, though. The effect of open review on animal methods bias has not yet been investigated or demonstrated, and it may introduce other biases, such as racial, gender, or seniority biases. These are all important factors when considering where to submit.

Want us to add a journal? Use our Contact link below to send us a message!

Back to the Author Guide