bioethics | Journament

Journal Ranking

#1443 / 33,950
📉 Poor
Overall Score
39.3/100
Score Breakdown
Engagement
30
Accessibility
15
Timeliness
50
Diversity
30
Innovation
40
Community Impact
35
Ethics & Transparency
0
Content Quality
0
Editorial Diversity
0
Publication Regularity
0
Geographic Reach
0
Updated 1 week ago

bioethics

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
Quality Widget - Embed on Your Website

Display your journal's quality scores on your website with our beautiful, self-contained widget. Choose between two embedding methods below.

One-Line JavaScript Embed (Recommended):
Advantages:
  • ✅ Simpler integration (just one line of code)
  • ✅ Better SEO (content is in same DOM)
  • ✅ No iframe limitations
  • ✅ Fully self-contained (no dependencies)
  • ✅ Works on any website regardless of CSS framework
  • ✅ Clickable badges link to full journal page
iFrame Embed Code:
Limitations:
  • ⚠️ Display-only (scores not clickable due to iframe constraints)
  • ⚠️ May have SEO limitations
  • ⚠️ Potential CORS/CSP issues on some websites
Preview:
Indexings
scopus ncbi ulakbim sci soc
Short Name bioethics
Abbreviated Name bioethics
ISSN 1467-8519
Aim and Scope
URL http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1467-8519
Author Instructions

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (26 total)

2019
Conflicting demands on a modern healthcare service: Can Rawlsian justice provide a guiding philosophy for the NHS and other socialized health services?
Fritz, Zoë;Cox, Caitríona;
Vol. 33 , No. 5 , pp. 609-616
418 views DOI Abstract
2020
Equitable access to ectogenesis for sexual and gender minorities.
Kimberly, Laura L;Sutter, Megan E;Quinn, Gwendolyn P;
354 views DOI Abstract
2018
Melanoma in the shopping mall: A utilitarian argument for offering unsolicited medical opinions in informal settings.
Preller, Gustav;Salloch, Sabine;
Vol. 32 , No. 3 , pp. 193-198
346 views DOI Abstract
2020
Regulating germline editing in assisted reproductive technology: An EU cross-disciplinary perspective.
Nordberg, Ana;Minssen, Timo;Feeney, Oliver;de Miguel Beriain, Iñigo;Galvagni, Lucia;Wartiovaara, Kirmo;
Vol. 34 , No. 1 , pp. 16-32
342 views DOI Abstract
2019
When the political becomes personal: Reflecting on disability bioethics.
Shakespeare, Tom;
Vol. 33 , No. 8 , pp. 914-921
316 views DOI Abstract
2018
Self-ownership, relational dignity, and organ sales.
Hershenov, David;
Vol. 32 , No. 7 , pp. 430-436
302 views DOI Abstract
2018
the challenges of water pollution: enforcement of water pollution control
;I Made Arya Utama;I Nengah Suharta
Vol. 4 , No. 1 , pp. 81-87
301 views DOI Abstract
2019
Developing a 'moral compass tool' based on moral case deliberations: A pragmatic hermeneutic approach to clinical ethics.
Hartman, Laura;Metselaar, Suzanne;Widdershoven, Guy;Molewijk, Bert;
300 views DOI Abstract
2019
Adjusting the focus: A public health ethics approach to data research.
Ballantyne, Angela;
Vol. 33 , No. 3 , pp. 357-366
293 views DOI Abstract
2004
Libertarian bioethics and religion: the case of H. Tristram Engelhardt, Jr.
Merry, Michael S;
Vol. 18 , No. 5 , pp. 387-407
280 views Abstract
View All 26 Articles
39
Overall
Poor
30
15
30
40
35
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

39.3/100

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

30.4/100

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

34.5/100

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.