Frontiers in Immunology Impact Factor

2025 Journal Impact Factor: 7.0

CiteScore: 11.3

Category standing: Q1

Citation count reported by Frontiers: 1,590,265

Quartile: Q1 (top 25%)

SJR: 1.941

SNIP: 1.259

Publisher: Frontiers Media SA

Type: Open-access peer-reviewed journal

Among Immunology journals, Frontiers in Immunology remains a Q1 broad immunology journal in the current release.

The current JIF of 7.0 should be read as a placement signal, not a guarantee that every accepted paper will draw high citations. The journal remains well-positioned, but section fit and methodological completeness still decide whether a manuscript belongs there.

Data sourced from current publisher metric checks and prior release context.

The current JIF is up from 5.9 in 2024 to 7.0 in 2025, though still below the pandemic-era 8.8 peak in 2021. That does not make the journal weak. It means authors should treat 7.0 as the operative 2026 placement number rather than relying on older Frontiers in Immunology citation reputation.

Scopus metrics complement the JCR impact factor by using different citation windows and weighting methods. They're useful when you want a fuller picture of a journal's standing, especially in systems that rely on Scopus rather than Web of Science.

The CiteScore of 11.3 is notably higher than the two-year JIF of 7.0, which reflects the longer citation window capturing more of Frontiers in Immunology's citation accumulation. The SJR of 1.941 supports the same broad read: a credible, visible immunology journal.

The trend matters because it tells a more honest story than the headline number alone. Frontiers in Immunology benefited from the same citation-rich period that lifted many life-science journals in 2020 and 2021, then moved lower as citation behavior normalized. The current 7 should be treated as the operative number for a 2026 shortlist, not as a temporary dip that authors should hand-wave away.

Frontiers in Immunology publishes across all immunology subfields:

• Adaptive immunity: T cell biology, B cell activation, antibody responses, immune memory

• Innate immunity: Innate lymphoid cells, pattern recognition, inflammatory pathways

• Immunotherapy: CAR-T cells, checkpoint inhibitors, immunological approaches to cancer

• Vaccines: Vaccine design, immunogenicity, protective immunity

• Autoimmunity: Regulatory T cells, loss of tolerance, self-reactive responses

• Transplantation: Graft rejection, tolerance induction, immune monitoring

• Infection: Pathogen-immune interactions, protective vs. pathogenic immunity

• Translational: Clinical translation of immunological research

The extremely broad scope is intentional. Frontiers in Immunology doesn't filter by subfield or application; it accepts any technically sound immunological research.

Frontiers in Immunology maintains moderate selectivity appropriate for Q1 status. Estimated acceptance rate: 45-55%.

Time to first decision: 60-90 days (standard for quality journals)

Time to publication: 2-4 weeks after acceptance (faster than traditional journals)

Open access: Required; APC ~$2,300

The official Frontiers journal page reports a decision timeline of about 77 days. That is the number to use for planning, not a vague promise of rapid open-access publication. If you need indexed open-access publication with broad immunology reach and you are not optimizing purely for prestige signaling, that matters.

The impact factor does not tell you:

• whether your manuscript is a strong section fit

• whether the paper is complete enough for external review

• how the journal will be perceived inside your exact subfield

• whether a narrower or more selective title would better serve the paper

Those questions still matter because Frontiers in Immunology is often chosen for practicality, reach, and scope fit, not only for brand.

Across immunology manuscripts, Frontiers in Immunology has a distinctive editorial profile that authors frequently misread:

The scope breadth is real, but section fit still matters. Frontiers in Immunology is divided into specialty sections (Inflammation, Cancer Immunity, T Cell Biology, etc.), and manuscripts are assigned to section associate editors who are domain specialists. A paper that fits the journal broadly but lands in the wrong section (or sits between sections) can bounce between editorial hands before finding a home. This causes delays that authors misinterpret as slow peer review. Identifying the correct Specialty Section and naming it in your cover letter is not optional.

The peer review model is different from traditional journals. Frontiers uses an "interactive review" process where reviews are conducted as a dialogue between authors and reviewers, with editors managing the conversation. Reviewers don't give a binary accept/reject recommendation; they give comments and authors respond in rounds. Authors who expect a traditional "major revision" letter are sometimes caught off guard by the interactive format. The practical implication: revisions need to be responsive and detailed, not just editorially polished.

Acceptance rate doesn't mean low bar. At 45-55% acceptance, Frontiers in Immunology is far more accessible than Nature Immunology or Immunity, but that's compared to a 5-8% bar, not to a 90% bar. We see manuscripts rejected here for underpowered sample sizes, missing statistical controls, or inadequate characterization of immune cell populations. Reviewers are genuine immunology experts and they apply field standards. The higher acceptance rate reflects the journal's broader scope and non-novelty filter, not a lower methodological threshold.

The specific risk pattern we observe most often is a paper that fits "immunology" in the broad sense but not the specialty section that will actually handle the review. In practice, that creates a hidden mismatch: the impact factor says the journal is strong enough, but the assigned editor is judging whether the manuscript belongs in Cancer Immunity and Immunotherapy, T Cell Biology, Mucosal Immunity, Inflammation, or another section with its own reviewer expectations.

A 7.0 JIF doesn't mean your Frontiers paper will get 7 citations. Some papers stay below 5 citations; others, especially reviews, accumulate 50+ citations. The JIF is strictly an average.

The Q1 standing is more meaningful: it confirms Frontiers in Immunology remains in the upper citation tier for immunology, with:

• Rigorous peer review

• Broad, active readership in diverse immunology subfields

• Indexed publication in major databases

• Strong citation momentum across immunological disciplines

Frontiers in Immunology accumulates citations because:

• Scope breadth: Covers all immunology subfields, creating multiple citation pathways

• Active field: Immunology research is high-volume and well-funded globally

• Open access: Free access increases discoverability and citation potential

• Growth trajectory: The journal has been consistently adding visibility and reach

Frontiers journals have built strong reputations in recent years, though some traditional researchers remain skeptical of open-access models. For career and funding purposes, Frontiers in Immunology is recognized as a legitimate, indexed venue. Q1 status carries weight in most evaluation systems.

That is why the metric should be read as a placement signal, not as a prestige verdict. It confirms the journal has real citation and visibility value. It does not mean every paper that could fit there should automatically go there.

• Impact factor explained for immunologists

• How to choose a journal for your research

• Nature Immunology impact factor and acceptance rate

Source: Frontiers' current journal metrics page and the 2026 Journal Citation Reports release. The current JIF reflects citations through 2025 for articles published in 2023-2024.

Last updated: June 2026