human vaccines & immunotherapeutics | Journament

Journal Ranking

#1258 / 33,943
📉 Poor
Overall Score
39.7/100
Score Breakdown
Engagement
31
Accessibility
15
Timeliness
50
Diversity
30
Innovation
40
Community Impact
43
Ethics & Transparency
0
Content Quality
0
Editorial Diversity
0
Publication Regularity
0
Geographic Reach
0
Updated 1 week ago

human vaccines & immunotherapeutics

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
ncbi ulakbim sci
Short Name hum vaccin immunother
Abbreviated Name hum vaccin immunother
ISSN 2164-554X
Aim and Scope
URL http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/khvi20#.VNvANVXF_3o
Author Instructions

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (39 total)

2016
Incidence of rotavirus gastroenteritis by age in African, Asian and European children: Relevance for timing of rotavirus vaccination
Steele AD;Madhi SA;Cunliffe NA;Vesikari T;Phua KB;Lim FS;Nelson EA;Lau YL;Huang LM;Karkada N;Debrus S;Han HH;Benninghoff B;;
Vol. 12 , No. 9 , pp. -
510 views Abstract
2019
Using the consolidated framework for implementation research (CFIR) to assess the implementation context of a quality improvement program to reduce missed opportunities for vaccination in Kano, Nigeria: a mixed methods study.
Adamu, Abdu A;Uthman, Olalekan A;Gadanya, Muktar A;Wiysonge, Charles S;
, pp. 1-11
449 views DOI Abstract
2019
Will the public take a universal influenza vaccine?: the need for social and behavioral science research.
Crouse Quinn, Sandra;Jamison, Amelia;
, pp. 1-4
429 views DOI Abstract
2020
Estimated cost-effectiveness and burden of disease associated with quadrivalent cell-based and egg-based influenza vaccines in Spain.
Ruiz-Aragón, Jesús;Gani, Ray;Márquez, Sergio;Alvarez, Piedad;
, pp. 1-7
381 views DOI Abstract
2019
A systematic review of immunogenicity, clinical efficacy and safety of human papillomavirus vaccines in people living with the human immunodeficiency virus.
Mavundza, Edison J;Wiyeh, Alison B;Mahasha, Phetole W;Halle-Ekane, Gregory;Wiysonge, Charles S;
370 views DOI Abstract
2020
Safety and immunogenicity of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in adults 60 years of age and older: a phase II, a randomized, comparative trial in Kazakhstan.
Sarsenbayeva, Gulbanu;Issagulov, Timur;Kassenov, Markhabat;Abitay, Ruslan;Orynbayev, Mukhit;Stukova, Marina;Pisareva, Maria;Davlyatshin, Timur;Lespek, Kutumbetov;Khairullin, Berik;
, pp. 1-7
360 views DOI Abstract
2020
Facebook HPV vaccine campaign: insights from Brazil.
Pereira da Veiga, Cássia Rita;Semprebon, Elder;da Silva, Jacqueline Laurindo;Lins Ferreira, Vinicius;Pereira da Veiga, Claudimar;
, pp. 1-11
350 views DOI Abstract
2019
Current situation, causes, and countermeasures to NIP vaccine shortages in Guangzhou, China.
Li, Zhiqun;Xu, Jindong;Xu, Jianxiong;Tan, Huifeng;Zhang, Chunhuan;
, pp. 1-4
350 views DOI Abstract
2019
Intersectoral cooperation to increase HPV vaccine coverage: an innovative collaboration between Managed Care Organizations and state-level stakeholders.
Askelson, Natoshia;Ryan, Grace;Seegmiller, Laura;Preiss, Alexander;Comstock, Sara;
, pp. 1-7
344 views DOI Abstract
2020
Ethical decision-making in biopharmaceutical research and development: applying values using the TRIP & TIPP model.
Poplazarova, Tatjana;van der Zee, Claar;Breuer, Thomas;
, pp. 1-8
343 views DOI Abstract
View All 39 Articles
40
Overall
Poor
31
15
30
40
43
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

39.7/100

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

31.0/100

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

43.0/100

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.