Critical Review of ''Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine''

Critical Review of ''Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine''

📄 Journal Overview

Publisher: Frontiers Media SA (Switzerland)
First published: 2014
Open access: Yes (CC-BY license)
Indexing: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, DOAJ
Recent metrics:
- Impact Factor (2023): ~2.8 (dropped from ~5.3 in 2022)
- CiteScore: ~5.5
- SJR: ~0.86 (Q2 in cardiology)

🟢 Strengths

Broad scope: covers basic, clinical, translational, and neuro-cardiology.
Immediate access: all articles are free to read and reuse.
Rapid review process: first decision typically in ~77 days.
Ethical framework: COPE member; promotes transparency and data reproducibility.

🔴 Criticisms

Editorial independence issues:

2015 resignations over editorial decisions overridden by Frontiers staff.

Questionable peer review past:

Historic concerns about reviewer limitations and rejection mechanisms.

Predatory label controversy:

Previously listed in Beall’s List (now defunct); still viewed as “grey-zone” by some institutions.

High volume, variable quality:

Massive growth in special issues and output may dilute editorial standards.

Volatile impact factor:

Sharp drop in IF suggests instability and potential loss of citation influence.

🧭 Final Assessment

Area	Evaluation
Accessibility & Indexing	✅ Strong visibility and indexing
Peer Review & Editorial Standards	⚠️ Mixed history; improved structure, but past concerns remain
Prestige & Reputation	❓ Controversial; varies by institution
Publication Strategy	📈 Good for mid-tier research needing reach; not ideal for top-impact work

💡 Conclusion

Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine offers excellent exposure and open-access publishing, but carries historical baggage regarding editorial integrity and quality control. Recommended with caution for standard work; not ideal for high-impact, cutting-edge research.