Indexed in Journament

The patient

ISSN 1178-1661· EN

Certificate of Indexing
Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
37.5/100
Journament Score
#12,265
Journament Rank
5
Articles Indexed

About This Journal

Short Name Patient
Abbreviated Name patient
ISSN 1178-1661

Indexings

scopus ncbi

Tools & Certificate of Indexing

Certificate of Indexing
Quality Badge Widget - Embed on Your Website

Display your journal's verified indexing scores on your website with our self-contained widget.

One-Line JavaScript Embed:
Advantages: Single-line script, seamless DOM integration, clickable badges linking to full journal profile.
Standard iFrame Embed Code:
Widget Preview:

Publications Per Year

Articles (5)

2020
Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Life Interference Questionnaire for Growth Hormone Deficiency (LIQ-GHD) to Assess Growth Hormone Injection Burden in Children and Adults.
Turner-Bowker, Diane M;Yaworsky, Andrew;Palladino, Andrew;Lamoureux, Roger E;Kelly, Masami;Love, Emily;Pleil, Andreas M;Shields, Alan;Loftus, Jane;
443 views DOI Abstract
2019
Patient-Centered Insights on Treatment Decision Making and Living with Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Other Hematologic Cancers.
Crawford, Rebecca;Sully, Kate;Conroy, Rebecca;Johnson, Chloe;Doward, Lynda;Bell, Timothy;Welch, Verna;Peloquin, Francois;Gater, Adam;
404 views DOI Abstract
2020
Reporting Formative Qualitative Research to Support the Development of Quantitative Preference Study Protocols and Corresponding Survey Instruments: Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers
Hollin, I.
Vol. 13 , pp. 121-136
293 views DOI
2023
Correction to: How Does the Public Evaluate Vaccines for Low‑Incidence, Severe‑Outcome Diseases? A General‑Population Choice Experiment.
Reed Johnson, F;Fairchild, Angelyn;Whittington, Dale;Srivastava, Amit K;Gonzalez, Juan Marcos;Huang, Liping;
Vol. 16 , No. 3 , pp. 287
114 views DOI
2023
How Does the Public Evaluate Vaccines for Low-Incidence, Severe-Outcome Diseases? A General-Population Choice Experiment.
Johnson, F Reed;Fairchild, Angelyn;Whittington, Dale;Srivastava, Amit K;Gonzalez, Juan Marcos;Huang, Liping;
Vol. 16 , No. 2 , pp. 139-151
109 views DOI Abstract
2023
How Does the Public Evaluate Vaccines for Low-Incidence, Severe-Outcome Diseases? A General-Population Choice Experiment.
Johnson, F Reed;Fairchild, Angelyn;Whittington, Dale;Srivastava, Amit K;Gonzalez, Juan Marcos;Huang, Liping;
Vol. 16 , No. 2 , pp. 139-151
109 views DOI Abstract
2023
Correction to: How Does the Public Evaluate Vaccines for Low‑Incidence, Severe‑Outcome Diseases? A General‑Population Choice Experiment.
Reed Johnson, F;Fairchild, Angelyn;Whittington, Dale;Srivastava, Amit K;Gonzalez, Juan Marcos;Huang, Liping;
Vol. 16 , No. 3 , pp. 287
114 views DOI
2020
Reporting Formative Qualitative Research to Support the Development of Quantitative Preference Study Protocols and Corresponding Survey Instruments: Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers
Hollin, I.
Vol. 13 , pp. 121-136
293 views DOI
2020
Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Life Interference Questionnaire for Growth Hormone Deficiency (LIQ-GHD) to Assess Growth Hormone Injection Burden in Children and Adults.
Turner-Bowker, Diane M;Yaworsky, Andrew;Palladino, Andrew;Lamoureux, Roger E;Kelly, Masami;Love, Emily;Pleil, Andreas M;Shields, Alan;Loftus, Jane;
443 views DOI Abstract
2019
Patient-Centered Insights on Treatment Decision Making and Living with Acute Myeloid Leukemia and Other Hematologic Cancers.
Crawford, Rebecca;Sully, Kate;Conroy, Rebecca;Johnson, Chloe;Doward, Lynda;Bell, Timothy;Welch, Verna;Peloquin, Francois;Gater, Adam;
404 views DOI Abstract
38
Overall
Poor
30
15
30
40
36
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

37.5/100

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

30.5/100

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

15.0/100

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

30.0/100

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

40.0/100

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

36.0/100

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

50.0/100

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

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

Ethics & Transparency Score

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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.