All Journal Guides

Journal Guide

Blood Impact Factor 23.1: Publishing Guide

ASH's flagship hematology journal: covering the full spectrum from basic hematology to clinical blood disorders

23.1

Impact Factor (2024)

~20%

Acceptance Rate

~30 days

Time to First Decision

What Blood Publishes

Blood is the American Society of Hematology's flagship journal and THE hematology journal globally. It publishes research spanning the complete spectrum from molecular hematology to clinical blood disorders, with particular strength in both bench science and bedside applications.

  • Basic hematology research: stem cells, blood development, hematopoiesis
  • Clinical hematology: leukemias, lymphomas, anemias, bleeding disorders
  • Translational blood research bridging basic science and clinical application
  • Immunohematology and blood banking with clinical relevance
  • Hematologic malignancy research including novel therapeutics
  • Thrombosis and hemostasis research with mechanistic and clinical components

Editor Insight

Blood succeeds because we serve the entire hematology community, from the basic scientist studying stem cell differentiation to the clinician treating acute leukemia. The best Blood papers advance both understanding and treatment of blood disorders. We want research that will be discussed in both lab meetings and tumor boards.

What Blood Editors Look For

Complete hematological stories

Blood wants papers that span from mechanism to clinical relevance. Pure basic science without clear connection to blood disorders faces tough odds. Pure clinical reports without mechanistic insight also struggle.

Novel insights into blood cell biology

How do blood cells develop, function, and malfunction? Research that advances fundamental understanding of hematopoiesis, blood cell differentiation, or blood disorder pathogenesis performs well.

Translational relevance to hematologic disease

Even basic research should have clear implications for understanding or treating blood disorders. The pathway from discovery to potential clinical application should be evident.

Rigorous methodology across bench and bedside

Whether you're doing single-cell RNA-seq or clinical trials, the methodology must be state-of-the-art. Blood reviews rigorously at both the technical and conceptual levels.

Integration of multiple approaches

Papers that combine in vitro, in vivo, and human studies perform exceptionally well. Blood values research that validates findings across multiple experimental systems.

Clinical significance for hematologists

For clinical papers, the findings should matter to practicing hematologists. Novel biomarkers, treatment responses, or disease mechanisms that change how blood disorders are managed.

Why Papers Get Rejected

These patterns appear repeatedly in manuscripts that don't make it past Blood's editorial review:

Pure basic biology using blood cells without hematologic relevance

If your paper uses blood cells to study generic cell biology questions without specific relevance to blood disorders, Blood isn't the right venue. Focus on hematologic-specific insights.

Clinical case series without mechanistic insights

Blood wants more than descriptive clinical reports. Even clinical papers need to advance understanding of disease mechanisms or provide insights that change practice.

Mouse-only studies without human validation

Blood increasingly expects human relevance. Mouse studies are fine as part of a complete story, but human blood samples or clinical correlations strengthen submissions dramatically.

Narrow subspecialty focus without broader hematologic relevance

Ultra-specialized research in one rare blood disorder may belong in subspecialty journals. Blood serves the entire hematology community, not just narrow specialists.

Inadequate validation of novel findings

Single experiments or small patient cohorts don't establish new principles in hematology. Blood expects strong validation across multiple systems and approaches.

Poor integration with existing hematology literature

Hematology has deep literature. Failing to position your work within existing knowledge or missing key references suggests insufficient field knowledge.

Does your manuscript avoid these patterns?

The quick diagnostic reads your full manuscript against Blood's criteria and flags the specific issues most likely to cause rejection.

Run Free Readiness Scan →

Insider Tips from Blood Authors

ASH meeting timing amplifies impact

Blood papers often get highlighted at ASH annual meetings, which significantly boosts visibility. Timing submissions around ASH abstract deadlines can be strategically valuable.

The basic-clinical spectrum is real strength

Unlike journals that focus exclusively on basic or clinical research, Blood genuinely values the full spectrum. Papers that bridge bench and bedside perform exceptionally well.

Stem cell and hematopoiesis research is core territory

Blood has a particular strength in hematopoietic stem cell research and blood development. If your work advances understanding of how blood cells are made or maintained, Blood is often the best venue.

Leukemia and lymphoma research gets prioritized

Hematologic malignancy research constitutes a large fraction of Blood's content. Well-designed studies in leukemia, lymphoma, or myeloma typically receive favorable review.

The ASH reviewer pool is unmatched

Blood draws reviewers from ASH's membership, giving access to the world's top hematologists. This means expert review but also high standards. Come prepared.

Thrombosis research has a dedicated home

Blood publishes extensively in thrombosis and hemostasis research. If your work advances understanding of bleeding or clotting disorders, this is often the premier venue.

Resource papers and databases are welcomed

Large-scale genomics studies, patient databases, and community resources in hematology find a home at Blood as Resource papers. These often become highly cited community standards.

Blood banking and transfusion medicine have dedicated space

Clinical research in blood banking, transfusion medicine, and immunohematology gets serious consideration, especially if it advances patient care or safety.

The Blood Submission Process

1

Direct submission

Editorial assignment within days

Submit complete manuscript with clear emphasis on hematologic significance and translational relevance. Include detailed methods and human relevance.

2

Editorial triage

1-2 weeks

ASH editor-in-chief and associate editors assess hematologic significance and technical quality. About 65% desk rejection rate.

3

Expert hematology review

3-4 weeks

2-3 reviewers from ASH membership with specific expertise in relevant hematology subspecialties. Focus on both technical rigor and hematologic significance.

4

Statistical and methodological review

Concurrent with peer review

Dedicated review of experimental design and statistical analysis. Particular attention to clinical trial methodology and basic research controls.

5

Revision and decision

~30 days to first decision

Most papers require revision. Blood provides detailed feedback aimed at strengthening both scientific rigor and hematologic relevance.

Blood by the Numbers

2024 Impact Factor(Clarivate JCR; highest in hematology)21.0
Submissions per year~4,500
Acceptance rate~20%
Desk rejection rate~65%
Time to first decision~30 days
ASH membership18,000+ hematologists globally
Biweekly publication24 issues/year
Citation half-life8+ years

Before you submit

Blood accepts a small fraction of submissions. Make your attempt count.

The pre-submission diagnostic runs a live literature search, scores your manuscript section by section, and gives you a prioritized fix list calibrated to Blood. ~30 minutes.

Article Types

Regular Articles

4,000 words

Full research reports in all areas of hematology

Brief Reports

2,000 words

Focused findings of significant interest

Clinical Trials

4,000 words

Reports of clinical trials in hematologic diseases

Reviews

6,000 words

In-depth reviews of hematologic topics

Perspectives

2,500 words

Forward-looking commentary (usually invited)

Landmark Blood Papers

Papers that defined fields and changed science:

  • Philadelphia chromosome discovery and CML pathogenesis (1970s-1980s, foundational)
  • Development of chronic lymphocytic leukemia prognostic systems (1990s-2000s)
  • Characterization of acute myeloid leukemia genetic subtypes (2000s-2010s)
  • CAR-T cell therapy development for hematologic malignancies (2010s-2020s)
  • Single-cell atlases of normal and malignant hematopoiesis (2020s)

Preparing a Blood Submission?

Get pre-submission feedback from reviewers who've published in Blood and know exactly what editors look for.

Run Free Readiness Scan

Need expert depth? Human review from $1,000

NDA-protected
Confidential

Primary Fields

Hematologic MalignanciesStem Cell BiologyThrombosis & HemostasisBlood BankingRed Cell DisordersImmunohematologyBone Marrow Transplantation