Indexed in Journament

bulletin des sociétés chimiques belges

EN

Certificate of Indexing
Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
36.1 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #6,885 of 29,297 scored journals (34,027 indexed)
65 Articles
Scores higher than 76.4% 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 bulletin des sociétés chimiques belges
Abbreviated Name bulletin des sociétés chimiques belges

Quality Profile

6 of 12 dimensions measured
Engagement 30.7
Timeliness 0.0
Diversity 42.6
Innovation 70.0
Community Impact 5.7
Content Distribution 59.8
This journal Average of scored journals
Platform statistics — the free Journament Score AI Quality Analysis — separate paid product, ranks nothing

6 of the 12 dimensions could not be measured for this journal. They are left out entirely rather than plotted as zero, and with 6 dimensions measured there is not enough of a profile to draw as a shape.

Show the numbers
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.7 30.5
Accessibility — 23.0
Timeliness 0.0 3.0
Diversity 42.6 25.9
Innovation 70.0 24.1
Community Impact 5.7 5.8
Content Distribution 59.8 89.5
Content Quality — 55.1
Ethics & Transparency — 40.5
Editorial Standards — 33.0
Publication Regularity — 52.9
Geographic Reach — 30.4

Publications Per Year

Articles (65)

2014
between pain and pleasure: pregnant women′s knowledge and preferences for pain relief in labor, a pilot study from zaria, northern nigeria
;Elizabeth O Ogboli-Nwasor;Sunday E Adaji
Vol. 8 , No. 5 , pp. 20-24
540 views DOI Abstract
2011
preanesthetic medication in children: a comparison of intranasal dexmedetomidine versus oral midazolam
;Ashraf M Ghali;Abdul Kader Mahfouz;Maher Al-Bahrani
Vol. 5 , No. 4 , pp. 387-391
509 views DOI Abstract
2014
effect of clonidine versus dexmedetomidine on pain control after laparoscopic gastric sleeve: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study
;Zoher M Naja;Rania Khatib;Fouad M Ziade;Georges Moussa;Zeina Z Naja;Ahmad Salah Eddine Naja;Saleh Kanawati
Vol. 8 , No. 5 , pp. 57-62
471 views DOI Abstract
2015
evaluating the quality of intravenous regional anesthesia following adding dexamethasone to lidocaine
;Ebrahim Hassani;Alireza Mahoori;Mir Mousa Aghdashi;Habibollah Pirnejad
Vol. 9 , No. 4 , pp. 418-421
457 views DOI Abstract
2013
survival rate in patients after sudden cardiac arrest at the university hospital of northern norway treated with or without opioids: a retrospective evaluation
;Vladimir Kuklin
Vol. 7 , No. 3 , pp. 310-314
450 views DOI Abstract
2013
hemiarthroplasty in high risk elderly patient under epidural anesthesia with 0.75% ropivacaine-fentanyl versus 0.5% bupivacaine-fentanyl: clinical trial
;Bhawna Rastogi;Kumkum Gupta;Avinash Rastogi;Prashant K Gupta;Apoorva B Singhal;Ivesh Singh
Vol. 7 , No. 2 , pp. 142-145
434 views DOI Abstract
2014
postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis: a comparative study of ondansetron, granisetron and granisetron and dexamethasone combination after modified radical mastectomy
;Pushplata Gupta;Shilpi Jain
Vol. 8 , No. 5 , pp. 67-71
405 views DOI Abstract
2017
ultrasound-guided multilevel paravertebral block versus local anesthesia for medical thoracoscopy
;Maha A Abo-Zeid;Mohammad M Elgamal;Asem A Hewidy;Amro A Moawad;Alaa Eldin Adel Elmaddawy
Vol. 11 , No. 4 , pp. 442-448
397 views DOI Abstract
2013
comparative evaluation of two doses of tranexamic acid used prophylactically in anemic parturients for lower segment cesarean section: a double-blind randomized case control prospective trial
;Upasana Goswami;Sushmita Sarangi;Sunali Gupta;Savita Babbar
Vol. 7 , No. 4 , pp. 427-431
382 views DOI Abstract
2011
accidental five fold overdose of propofol for induction in a 38-days-old infant undergoing emergency bilateral inguinal hernia repair
;Mahin Seyedhejazi;Ghafur Abafattash;Reza Taheri
Vol. 5 , No. 4 , pp. 417-418
365 views DOI Abstract
2018
evaluation of the neurotoxicity of intrathecal dexmedetomidine on rat spinal cord (electromicroscopic observations)
;Dilek Ozdamar;Huban Dayıoglu;Ihsan Anık;Seyhun Solakoglu;Mine Solak;Kamil Toker
Vol. 12 , No. 1 , pp. 10-15
281 views DOI Abstract
2017
ultrasound-guided multilevel paravertebral block versus local anesthesia for medical thoracoscopy
;Maha A Abo-Zeid;Mohammad M Elgamal;Asem A Hewidy;Amro A Moawad;Alaa Eldin Adel Elmaddawy
Vol. 11 , No. 4 , pp. 442-448
397 views DOI Abstract
2017
digital assistance of nasogastric tube insertion in intubated patients under general anesthesia: a single-blinded prospective randomized study
;Alrefaey Kandeel;Mohammed Elmorhedi;Usama Abdalla
Vol. 11 , No. 3 , pp. 283-286
155 views DOI Abstract
2016
the correlation between body mass index, limb circumferences and blood pressure cuff fit in bariatric surgical patients
;R Schumann;O Alyamani;A Viswanath;I Bonney
Vol. 10 , No. 2 , pp. 182-186
80 views DOI Abstract
2016
multiple pterygium syndrome: challenge for anesthesiologist
;P Sethi;P K Bhatia;N Gupta;K Singh
Vol. 10 , No. 3 , pp. 350-352
48 views DOI Abstract
2016
comparative effect of propofol versus sevoflurane on renal ischemia/reperfusion injury after elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair
;A S Ammar;K M Mahmoud
Vol. 10 , No. 3 , pp. 301-307
282 views DOI Abstract
2016
complete airway obstruction with inferior turbinate avulsion after nasotracheal intubation
;Vipin Kumar Goyal;Sohan Lal Solanki;Amrita U Parekh;Prakash Gupta
Vol. 10 , No. 1 , pp. 114-115
306 views DOI
2016
another utility of signature capnogram: detection of sodalime canister detachment from anesthesia machine
;Sanjay Kumar;Manjaree Mishra;Amrita Bhattacharyya
Vol. 10 , No. 4 , pp. 483-485
206 views DOI
2016
inadvertent intrathecal injection of labetalol
;S Verma;P K Bhatia;V Sharma;P Sethi
Vol. 10 , No. 3 , pp. 345-346
165 views DOI Abstract
2015
conscious sedation for middle ear surgeries: a comparison between fentanyl-propofol and fentanyl-midazolam infusion
;Raghu S Thota;Manasi Ambardekar;Priyamvada Likhate
Vol. 9 , No. 2 , pp. 117-121
325 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
36.1/100 · Poor
Ranked #6,885 of 29,297 scored
(34,027 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.
Journament

Overall Quality Score

36.1/100

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

30.7/100

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

Not yet measured

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

42.6/100

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

5.7/100

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

0.0/100

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

59.8/100

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.