Every Journals article from the Scientific Figure blog.
JAMA reports a 2025 Journal Impact Factor of 65.4 and a 10% acceptance rate. All 13 JAMA Network journals compared in one table — impact factor, acceptance rate and decision times from each journal’s own About page — plus the figure requirements the whole network shares, including the policy that JAMA re-creates your graphs.
Nature’s 2025 Journal Impact Factor is 56.1, with a 5-year JIF of 56.7 and an acceptance rate of about 8%. The full metric set from Nature’s own Journal Metrics page, how it ranks inside the Nature Portfolio, and the figure specifications — width, dpi, point size, file formats, gel and blot rules — that decide whether your artwork survives production.
PNAS reports a 2025 Journal Impact Factor of 9.5, a 13% acceptance rate for Direct Submissions and a cited half-life of 11.5 years. The full metric set from the journal’s own metrics page, why the number sits so far below Nature’s, and the figure specifications — including the 1,000–1,200 ppi line-art requirement almost nobody meets.
PNAS Nexus reports a 2025 Journal Impact Factor of 4.8, a CiteScore of 6.7, and a $3,599 article processing charge. It shares an image-integrity policy with PNAS word for word, and contradicts it on file formats and resolution. The metrics, the fees, the figure specs, and the four numbers PNAS Nexus does not publish at all.
Every figure and formatting rule Scientific Reports actually publishes — display item limits, legend length, accepted file types, line weight, lettering and colour mode — plus an honest answer on the three specs it never states: DPI, column width and minimum font size.
Start free with 50 credits — no credit card, no design skills required.
