supportive care in cancer | Journament

Journal Ranking

#1321 / 33,944
📉 Poor
Overall Score
39.6/100
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

supportive care in cancer

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 ulakbim sci
Short Name supportive care in cancer
Abbreviated Name supportive care in cancer
ISSN 0941-4355
Aim and Scope
URL https://www.springer.com/journal/520
Author Instructions

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (50 total)

2019
comparative analysis of adverse events using different methods of prostate biopsy
;A. A. Keln;A. V. Zyryanov;A. A. Izmailov;P. B. Zotov;V. G. Znobishchev;А. V. Ponomarev
Vol. 15 , No. 1 , pp. 66-74
431 views DOI Abstract
2014
Monotherapy with piperacillin/tazobactam versus combination therapy with ceftazidime plus amikacin as an empiric therapy for fever in neutropenic cancer patients
U. Hess;C. Böhme;K. Rey;H. J. Senn;U. Hess;C. Böhme;K. Rey;H. J. Senn;
Vol. 6 , No. 4 , pp. 402-409
367 views DOI Abstract
2020
Effects of Internet-based psycho-educational interventions on mental health and quality of life among cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis - Supportive Care in Cancer
Ying Wang;Yazhu Lin;Jingyi Chen;Chunfeng Wang;Rong Hu;Yong Wu;Ying Wang;Yazhu Lin;Jingyi Chen;Chunfeng Wang;Rong Hu;Yong Wu;
Vol. 28 , No. 6 , pp. 2541-2552
348 views DOI Abstract
2018
NOLAN: a randomized, phase 2 study to estimate the effect of prophylactic naproxen or loratadine vs no prophylactic treatment on bone pain in patients with early-stage breast cancer receiving chemotherapy and pegfilgrastim
Kirshner, J.
Vol. 26 , pp. 1323-1334
327 views DOI
2014
sparing cystectomy in patients with transitional-cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder
;V. B. Matveyev;M. I. Volkova;K. M. Figurin;M. V. Peters
Vol. 5 , No. 1 , pp. 27-31
312 views Abstract
2019
Usability testing of EirV3—a computer-based tool for patient-reported outcome measures in cancer
Krogstad, H.
Vol. 27 , pp. 1835-1844
311 views DOI
2019
The association of socioeconomic status with quality of life in cancer patients over a 6-month period using individual growth models
Roick, J.
Vol. 27 , pp. 3347-3355
287 views DOI
2018
comparison of the significance of the renal, padua, and c-index nephrometric scales for the prediction of the complexity of laparoscopic nephrectomy
;Yu. G. Alyaev;E. S. Sirota;L. M. Rapoport;E. A. Bezrukov;R. B. Sukhanov;D. G. Tsarichenko
Vol. 14 , No. 1 , pp. 36-46
283 views DOI Abstract
2014
transfusion therapy in the radical surgical treatment of patients with urinary bladder and prostate cancers
;N. A. Bolikhova;M. V. Petrova;А. А. Kostin
Vol. 5 , No. 2 , pp. 75-77
282 views Abstract
2008
Oral moxifloxacin or intravenous ceftriaxone for the treatment of low-risk neutropenic fever in cancer patients suitable for early hospital discharge
Catherine Sebban;Sophie Dussart;Christine Fuhrmann;Hervé Ghesquieres;Isabelle Rodrigues;Lionel Geoffrois;Yves Devaux;Laurence Lancry;Giselle Chvetzoff;Thomas Bachelot;Maria Chelghoum;Pierre Biron;Catherine Sebban;Sophie Dussart;Christine Fuhrmann;Hervé Ghesquieres;Isabelle Rodrigues;Lionel Geoffrois;Yves Devaux;Laurence Lancry;Giselle Chvetzoff;Thomas Bachelot;Maria Chelghoum;Pierre Biron;
Vol. 16 , No. 9 , pp. 1017-1023
280 views DOI Abstract
View All 50 Articles
40
Overall
Poor
30
15
30
40
35
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

39.6/100

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.