Indexed in Journament

British journal of clinical pharmacology

ISSN 1365-2125· EN

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
32.3 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #14,517 of 29,312 scored journals (34,012 indexed)
44 Articles
Scores higher than 50.4% of scored journals
050100
The Journament Score is computed from platform statistics — reader engagement, accessibility, publication timeliness, keyword breadth, community impact and content distribution — into a single 0–100 figure, recalculated as new articles and metadata are indexed. Dimensions that cannot be measured for this journal are excluded rather than estimated. It is independent of the paid AI Quality Analysis, which never affects this score or the ranking. Full methodology →

About This Journal

Short Name Br J Clin Pharmacol
Abbreviated Name br j clin pharmacol
ISSN 1365-2125
URL https://bpspubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/13652125

Quality Profile

7 of 12 dimensions measured
This journal Average of scored journals
Platform statistics — the free Journament Score AI Quality Analysis — separate paid product, ranks nothing

5 of the 12 dimensions could not be measured for this journal. They are left as gaps in the shape rather than plotted as zero.

Show the numbers
Journament quality dimensions for British journal of clinical pharmacology
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.6 30.4
Accessibility 20.0 20.4
Timeliness 20.0 5.8
Diversity 5.6 24.4
Innovation 70.0 25.7
Community Impact 10.0 5.8
Content Distribution 67.7 88.6
Content Quality 55.5
Ethics & Transparency 40.2
Editorial Standards 33.4
Publication Regularity 53.2
Geographic Reach 30.8

Publications Per Year

Articles (44)

2019
Clinical value of analytical testing in patients presenting with New Psychoactive Substances intoxication.
419 views DOI Abstract
2019
Haematological adverse events associated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors in chronic myeloid leukaemia: A network meta-analysis.
401 views DOI Abstract
2019
Longitudinal exposure of English primary care patients to pharmacogenomic drugs: an analysis to inform design of pre-emptive pharmacogenomic testing.
395 views DOI Abstract
2017
Autoinhibitory properties of the parent but not of the N-oxide metabolite contribute to infusion rate-dependent voriconazole pharmacokinetics.
Vol. 83 , No. 9 , pp. 1954-1965
384 views DOI Abstract
2016
the role of the multidisciplinary health care team in the management of patients with marfan syndrome
Vol. Volume 9 , pp. 587-614
370 views Abstract
2020
Using GRADE methodology to assess innovation of new medicinal products in Italy.
Vol. 86 , No. 1 , pp. 93-105
356 views DOI Abstract
2011
Effects of safety warnings on prescription rates of cough and cold medicines in children below 2 years of age.
Vol. 71 , No. 6 , pp. 943-50
356 views DOI Abstract
2019
New drugs approved for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in 2018.
337 views DOI Abstract
2023
CYP2D6 and CYP2C8 pharmacogenetics and pharmacological interactions to predict imatinib plasmatic exposure in GIST patients.
Vol. 89 , No. 3 , pp. 1089-1098
125 views DOI Abstract
2020
Assessment of serum cytokines predicts clinical and endoscopic outcomes to vedolizumab in ulcerative colitis patients
Vol. 86 , No. 7 , pp. -
257 views Abstract
2020
Using GRADE methodology to assess innovation of new medicinal products in Italy.
Vol. 86 , No. 1 , pp. 93-105
356 views DOI Abstract
2019
The clinical challenges of synthetic cathinones.
320 views DOI Abstract
2019
Longitudinal exposure of English primary care patients to pharmacogenomic drugs: an analysis to inform design of pre-emptive pharmacogenomic testing.
395 views DOI Abstract
2019
Clinical value of analytical testing in patients presenting with New Psychoactive Substances intoxication.
419 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
32.3/100 · Poor
Ranked #14,517 of 29,312 scored
(34,012 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.

Overall Quality Score

32.3/100

Tier: Poor

The Journament Overall Quality Score is a comprehensive metric that evaluates academic journals across multiple dimensions including engagement, accessibility, diversity, innovation, and community impact.

This score helps researchers, institutions, and publishers understand the holistic quality and impact of a journal beyond traditional metrics.

Engagement Score

30.6/100

Measures user interactions, views, citations, and community involvement with this journal's content.

Higher engagement scores indicate that the journal's content is actively being read, cited, and discussed within the academic community.

Accessibility Score

20.0/100

Evaluates how easily researchers can access journal content, including open access availability, ISSN registration, and indexing.

This metric considers factors such as paywalls, open access policies, and availability across different academic databases and search engines.

Diversity Score

5.6/100

Assesses geographic and institutional diversity of authors, editorial board composition, and topic breadth.

A diverse journal publishes work from various geographic regions, institutions, and covers a broad range of topics within its field.

Innovation Score

70.0/100

Evaluates research novelty, interdisciplinary work, and emerging topics based on AI analysis of article abstracts.

This score reflects how much the journal publishes cutting-edge research, explores new methodologies, and bridges different academic disciplines.

Community Impact Score

10.0/100

Measures scholarly contribution and real-world applications of published research.

This metric evaluates how the journal's research translates into practical applications, policy changes, and benefits to society beyond academia.

Timeliness Score

20.0/100

Evaluates recent publication activity, publication frequency, and currency of research topics.

Higher scores indicate consistent publishing schedules and timely coverage of current research trends.

Content Distribution

67.7/100

Measures how evenly reader attention spreads across the journal's articles, using the Gini coefficient of article clicks.

Higher scores mean readership is distributed across many articles rather than concentrated on one or two.

Ethics & Transparency Score

Not yet measured

Research Integrity (10% weight)

Assesses COPE standards compliance, ethical considerations in research, transparency in methodologies, and reproducibility practices.

This metric ensures the journal maintains high ethical standards and promotes transparent, trustworthy research.

Content Quality Score

Not yet measured

Academic Rigor (20% weight) + Methodology Quality (12%)

Evaluates research methodology soundness, statistical rigor, theoretical framework strength, appropriateness of research methods, data quality, and clarity & readability.

This comprehensive metric ensures published research meets the highest academic standards.

Editorial Diversity Score

Not yet measured

Author Diversity + Interdisciplinary Value (8%)

Measures geographic diversity of authors, institutional variety, editorial board composition, and cross-disciplinary connections.

Diverse editorial teams bring varied perspectives and reduce bias in academic publishing.

Publication Regularity Score

Not yet measured

Assesses consistency of publication schedule, frequency stability, and predictable output patterns.

Regular publication schedules indicate reliable journal operations and consistent workflow management.

Geographic Reach Score

Not yet measured

Evaluates international author representation, global readership distribution, and cross-border research collaboration.

Wide geographic reach indicates global impact and international recognition of the journal's research.