JIG uses an open access model so immunology and geriatrics evidence is immediately available to clinicians, gerontologists, policy teams, and researchers worldwide. APCs support peer review management, editorial quality control, production formatting, DOI metadata, and long-term archiving.

No submission fee is required. Charges are invoiced after acceptance, and editorial decisions are based solely on scientific quality, methodological rigor, and translational relevance for older populations.

The pricing framework is designed for predictability. Standard publication services are included by default, and institutional billing support can be coordinated for grant and procurement workflows.

Waiver review is independent from peer review outcomes. Manuscript quality criteria remain identical for all authors regardless of payment pathway.

For multicenter immunology and geriatrics projects, publication planning should begin when the study budget is drafted, not after peer review. Teams can pre-assign APC responsibility to grant lines, departmental publication funds, or institutional open access agreements. This approach avoids late-stage procurement delays and allows accepted manuscripts to move directly into production.

JIG APCs cover editorial triage, external peer review coordination, technical quality checks, copyediting, XML and PDF production, DOI registration, and platform hosting. Charges are not linked to editorial outcome and are communicated only after an acceptance decision. That separation protects scientific independence and keeps reviewer recommendations focused on evidence quality.

Research offices can request formal pro forma invoices after acceptance for internal approvals. If your institution requires supplier onboarding or purchase-order references, share those requirements early with the editorial office. Early alignment reduces time between acceptance and publication, which is especially important for time-sensitive findings in immune aging and frailty risk assessment.

Waiver and discount requests are reviewed through a structured process that considers funding availability, country eligibility, and documented hardship. Authors should submit waiver documentation with clear supporting context. Decisions are independent from peer review, and manuscripts are evaluated under the same quality standards regardless of financial pathway.

If your article includes large datasets, complex graphics, or substantial supplementary materials, plan production resources in advance. Well-organized files and complete metadata reduce revision loops and accelerate online release. A clear publication package also improves downstream discoverability in indexing systems and institutional repositories.

For billing clarifications, consortium questions, or institutional invoicing workflows, contact [email protected]. The support team can coordinate with both corresponding authors and administrative offices so accepted work in immunology and geriatrics reaches readers quickly and with full compliance documentation.

To improve budget accountability, corresponding authors should circulate APC assumptions with coauthors before submission and include publication costs in internal project trackers. Early alignment prevents ownership confusion after acceptance and supports transparent cost allocation across departments, labs, and collaborating institutions.

Teams preparing grant reports can cite open-access publication outcomes as part of knowledge translation impact. Fast public availability of peer-reviewed findings improves clinical visibility, supports citation growth, and helps funders verify that supported research reaches practitioners, investigators, and policy communities.

Publication success in JIG is strongest when teams combine scientific rigor with operational readiness. Before submission, align manuscript messaging across title, abstract, methods, and conclusions, confirm complete declarations, and assign one corresponding author to coordinate communication. After submission, fast responses to editorial queries and reviewer comments reduce avoidable delays and preserve momentum. This discipline is especially important for immunology and geriatrics research where timely dissemination can influence practice and policy decisions for vulnerable populations. Authors who plan workflow end-to-end, from first upload through production proofing, generally experience smoother review cycles, stronger decision outcomes, and faster online publication.