In early 2026, the International Society of Sports Nutrition announced a new five-year publishing agreement with MDPI. Starting in January 2027, the Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition — better known as JISSN — will be published by MDPI.

For most athletes, coaches, and even many practitioners, this may sound like a publishing industry update rather than a sports nutrition story.

But it is worth paying attention to.

JISSN is not just another nutrition journal. It is the official journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition and has become one of the key academic platforms for research on supplements, exercise metabolism, body composition, recovery, and performance nutrition. Many of the position stands and reviews published in or associated with this field have shaped how practitioners talk about protein, creatine, caffeine, nutrient timing, ketogenic diets, antioxidants, and many other topics.

So when JISSN changes publishing platforms, the question is not only “Who publishes the journal?”

The better question is:

Will this help high-quality sports nutrition research become easier to access, easier to publish, and easier to apply responsibly?

That is what we should be watching.

Why JISSN Matters

Sports nutrition moves quickly. New supplements appear. Old ingredients return with new claims. Athletes experiment with diets, recovery methods, and performance strategies long before the evidence is fully settled.

In that kind of environment, journals like JISSN play an important role.

They help separate interesting ideas from well-supported claims. They give researchers a place to test practical questions. They give coaches and nutrition professionals a better foundation than social media trends or marketing language.

JISSN focuses on sports nutrition, supplementation, exercise metabolism, body composition, and performance-related outcomes. That scope matters because sports nutrition is not simply “general nutrition plus exercise.” It has its own practical questions.

Does this supplement improve performance, or only change a biomarker?

Does a nutrition strategy help trained athletes, or only untrained participants?

Does a study measure real performance outcomes, or just short-term physiology?

Can the results apply to resistance training, endurance sport, team sport, or tactical populations?

These are the questions practitioners actually need answered.

Speed Is Useful — But Rigor Still Matters More

One topic that always comes up with open-access publishing is speed.

Faster review and publication can be helpful. Science should not sit in a queue forever, especially in applied fields where practitioners are waiting for evidence. But in sports nutrition, fast publishing is only valuable if editorial standards remain strong.

This is where JISSN’s reputation matters.

The value of JISSN has never been only the journal name. It comes from editorial oversight, peer review, methodological quality, scientific debate, and relevance to the field. If the move to MDPI improves workflow while preserving editorial rigor, that would be a positive step.

But readers should still do what good readers always do: read the study, not just the headline.

A paper being open access does not automatically make it strong. A paper being published quickly does not automatically make it weak. The quality still depends on the research question, study design, population, control conditions, statistical analysis, transparency, conflicts of interest, and whether the conclusions match the data.

That is especially important in sports nutrition, where a small performance claim can quickly become a product claim.

What Researchers Should Watch Before Submitting

For researchers planning to submit to JISSN around the transition period, the practical advice is simple: check the official journal instructions before preparing the manuscript.

From January 2027, authors should expect that some administrative details may change. These may include the submission portal, formatting requirements, article processing charges, editorial workflow, publication policies, and author guidelines.

That does not mean the scientific identity of the journal will change. But it does mean authors should avoid relying on old saved templates or outdated submission notes.

Before submitting, authors should confirm:

• the current submission platform;
• article types accepted by the journal;
• formatting and reference style;
• ethics and trial registration requirements;
• open-access fees and institutional funding policies;
• data availability and transparency expectations;
• conflict-of-interest and supplement-industry disclosure requirements;
• whether the manuscript clearly fits the journal’s sports nutrition scope.

That last point is important.

JISSN is not the best home for every nutrition paper. A manuscript should have a clear connection to exercise, training adaptation, performance, supplementation, body composition, recovery, or metabolism in physically active or relevant populations.

A paper may be good science and still not be a good fit for JISSN.

What Practitioners Should Watch

For practitioners, the platform change may matter in a different way.

If JISSN remains easy to access and its research becomes more visible, that could help coaches, nutritionists, educators, and athletes engage more directly with primary literature.

That is a good thing.

Sports nutrition is often filtered through second-hand summaries, influencer posts, short videos, product pages, and simplified “takeaways.” Those formats are not automatically bad, but they can remove important context.

A supplement study may show an effect only under very specific conditions.

A protein study may use a dose, training program, or population that does not match the reader.

A recovery strategy may work in a lab but be unrealistic in a team sport setting.

An endurance nutrition paper may apply to trained cyclists but not necessarily to recreational runners.

Better access to primary research gives practitioners the chance to ask better questions. It also makes scientific literacy more important.

Open access gives us the paper. It does not do the critical thinking for us.

What the Sports Nutrition Industry Should Watch

The sports nutrition industry should also pay attention.

JISSN has long been influential in how the industry discusses evidence. Many brands, educators, formulators, and consultants refer to JISSN papers when explaining ingredients, claims, mechanisms, or practical applications.

With greater visibility, there may be more opportunities for research to reach product developers and consumers. But that also increases responsibility.

Industry professionals should be careful not to overstate findings. A study showing improved performance in one context does not automatically justify broad marketing language. A review suggesting potential benefits does not mean every product with that ingredient is evidence-based. A position stand should be read as a structured synthesis, not as permission to make unsupported claims.

The better use of JISSN research is not to search for marketing lines.

It is to understand evidence quality, practical relevance, appropriate dosing, population differences, safety considerations, and where the field still has uncertainty.

A Good Moment for Better Evidence Culture

The JISSN-MDPI transition is a publishing update, but it can also be seen as a reminder.

Sports nutrition needs more than access. It needs better evidence culture.

That means researchers should design studies that answer real-world questions. Practitioners should read beyond abstracts. Educators should teach students how to evaluate methods. Companies should communicate research responsibly. Athletes should understand that “published” does not always mean “proven.”

If open access makes more research available, the next step is making that research understandable without oversimplifying it.

That is where organizations, educators, and professional communities have work to do.