Indexed in Journament

journal of dinamika hukum

ISSN 0000-0000· EN

Certificate of Indexing
Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
24.5 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #27,907 of 29,341 scored journals (33,995 indexed)
22 Articles
Scores higher than 4.8% 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 journal of dinamika hukum
Abbreviated Name journal of dinamika hukum
ISSN 0000-0000

Quality Profile

5 of 12 dimensions measured
Engagement 30.3
Timeliness 0.0
Innovation 9.0
Community Impact 7.9
Content Distribution 65.4
This journal Average of scored journals
Platform statistics — the free Journament Score AI Quality Analysis — separate paid product, ranks nothing

7 of the 12 dimensions could not be measured for this journal. They are left out entirely rather than plotted as zero, and with 5 dimensions measured there is not enough of a profile to draw as a shape.

Show the numbers
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.3 30.1
Accessibility — 17.9
Timeliness 0.0 19.2
Diversity — 28.8
Innovation 9.0 31.2
Community Impact 7.9 13.4
Content Distribution 65.4 88.4
Content Quality — 55.5
Ethics & Transparency — 40.2
Editorial Standards — 33.4
Publication Regularity — 53.2
Geographic Reach — 30.8

Publications Per Year

Articles (22)

2011
comparison of the laryngeal view during tracheal intubation using airtraq and macintosh laryngoscopes by unskillful anesthesiology residents: a clinical study
;Carlos Ferrando;Gerardo Aguilar;F. Javier Belda
Vol. 2011 , pp. -
432 views DOI Abstract
2017
what do anesthesiologists know about p values, confidence intervals, and correlations: a pilot survey
;Patrick Schober;Sebastiaan M. Bossers;Phi-Vu Dong;Christa Boer;Lothar A. Schwarte
Vol. 2017 , pp. -
415 views DOI Abstract
2018
disparity between high satisfaction and severe pain in patients after caesarean section: a prospective observational-controlled investigation
;Thomas Hesse;Andreas Julich;James Paul;Klaus Hahnenkamp;Taras I. Usichenko
Vol. 2018 , pp. -
405 views DOI Abstract
2010
PENERAPAN ASAS PACTA TERTIIS NEC NOCENT NEC PROSUNT BERKAITAN DENGAN STATUS HUKUM DAERAH DASAR LAUT SAMUDERA DALAM (SEA BED)
Yuliatiningsih, Aryuni;
Vol. 10 , No. 1 , pp. -
377 views Abstract
2010
comparison of the clinical use of macintosh and miller laryngoscopes for orotracheal intubation by second-month nurse students in anesthesiology
;Somchai Amornyotin;Ungkab Prakanrattana;Phongthara Vichitvejpaisal;Thantima Vallisut;Neunghathai Kunanont;Ladda Permpholprasert
Vol. 2010 , pp. -
358 views DOI Abstract
2014
a triple-masked, randomized controlled trial comparing ultrasound-guided brachial plexus and distal peripheral nerve block anesthesia for outpatient hand surgery
;Nicholas C. K. Lam;Matthew Charles;Deana Mercer;Codruta Soneru;Jennifer Dillow;Francisco Jaime;Timothy R. Petersen;Edward R. Mariano
Vol. 2014 , pp. -
331 views DOI Abstract
2012
hip fracture mortality: is it affected by anesthesia techniques?
;Saffet Karaca;Egemen Ayhan;Hayrettin Kesmezacar;Omer Uysal
Vol. 2012 , pp. -
329 views DOI Abstract
2011
KEADILAN DALAM PERSPEKTIF FILSAFAT ILMU HUKUM
Dwisvimiar, Inge;
Vol. 11 , No. 3 , pp. -
319 views Abstract
2011
GAGASAN PENGATURAN HUKUM PEMERIKSAAN PERSEROAN TERBATAS (Suatu Evaluasi Normatif terhadap Pasal 138 - Pasal 141 Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas)
Syaifuddin, Muhammad;
Vol. 11 , No. 2 , pp. -
287 views Abstract
2012
PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP PEREMPUAN DALAM PROSES GUGAT CERAI (KHULU’) DI PENGADILAN AGAMA PALEMBANG
Syaifuddin, ;Turatmiyah, Sri;
Vol. 12 , No. 2 , pp. 248-260
283 views Abstract
2018
absence of association between preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rates and postoperative outcomes following elective gastrointestinal surgeries: a prospective cohort study
;Sivesh K. Kamarajah;Behrad Barmayehvar;Mustafa Sowida;Amirul Adlan;Christina Reihill;Parvez Ellahee
Vol. 2018 , pp. -
253 views DOI Abstract
2018
does the use of nitroglycerin patch improve local anaesthetic effects in bier’s block? a double-blind placebo controlled study
;Ahmed Said Elgebaly
Vol. 2018 , pp. -
173 views DOI Abstract
2018
comment on “pregabalin effect on acute and chronic pain after cardiac surgery”
;Elena Theodorou;Evagelia Bali
Vol. 2018 , pp. -
185 views DOI
2018
disparity between high satisfaction and severe pain in patients after caesarean section: a prospective observational-controlled investigation
;Thomas Hesse;Andreas Julich;James Paul;Klaus Hahnenkamp;Taras I. Usichenko
Vol. 2018 , pp. -
405 views DOI Abstract
2017
factors associated with postoperative prolonged mechanical ventilation in pediatric liver transplant recipients
;Olubukola O. Nafiu;Katari Carello;Anjana Lal;John Magee;Paul Picton
Vol. 2017 , pp. -
192 views DOI Abstract
2017
what do anesthesiologists know about p values, confidence intervals, and correlations: a pilot survey
;Patrick Schober;Sebastiaan M. Bossers;Phi-Vu Dong;Christa Boer;Lothar A. Schwarte
Vol. 2017 , pp. -
415 views DOI Abstract
2016
current trends in neuromuscular blockade, management, and monitoring amongst singaporean anaesthetists
;Wendy H. Teoh;Thomas Ledowski;Phillip S. Tseng
Vol. 2016 , pp. -
204 views DOI Abstract
2015
the impact of a dedicated research education month for anesthesiology residents
;Robert E. Freundlich;Jessica W. Newman;Kevin K. Tremper;Jill M. Mhyre;Sachin Kheterpal;Theodore J. Sanford;Alan R. Tait
Vol. 2015 , pp. -
217 views DOI Abstract
2014
a triple-masked, randomized controlled trial comparing ultrasound-guided brachial plexus and distal peripheral nerve block anesthesia for outpatient hand surgery
;Nicholas C. K. Lam;Matthew Charles;Deana Mercer;Codruta Soneru;Jennifer Dillow;Francisco Jaime;Timothy R. Petersen;Edward R. Mariano
Vol. 2014 , pp. -
331 views DOI Abstract
2012
lasting developmental effects of neonatal fentanyl exposure in preweanling rats
;Dora Catré;Maria Francelina Lopes;António Silvério Cabrita
Vol. 2012 , pp. -
150 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
24.5/100 · Poor
Ranked #27,907 of 29,341 scored
(33,995 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.
Journament

Overall Quality Score

24.5/100

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

30.3/100

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

Not yet measured

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

9.0/100

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

7.9/100

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

65.4/100

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.