Indexed in Journament

BMJ

ISSN 1756-1833· EN

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
31.0 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #21,074 of 29,341 scored journals (33,995 indexed)
225 Articles
Scores higher than 28.1% 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 BMJ
Abbreviated Name bmj (clinical research ed)
ISSN 1756-1833

Quality Profile

6 of 12 dimensions measured
Engagement 30.9
Timeliness 0.0
Diversity 63.0
Innovation 70.0
Community Impact 7.9
Content Distribution 5.6
This journal Average of scored journals
Platform statistics — the free Journament Score AI Quality Analysis — separate paid product, ranks nothing

6 of the 12 dimensions could not be measured for this journal. They are left out entirely rather than plotted as zero, and with 6 dimensions measured there is not enough of a profile to draw as a shape.

Show the numbers
Journament quality dimensions for BMJ
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.9 30.1
Accessibility 17.9
Timeliness 0.0 19.2
Diversity 63.0 28.8
Innovation 70.0 31.2
Community Impact 7.9 13.4
Content Distribution 5.6 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 (225)

2021
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
93,866 views DOI
2015
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation
13,054 views DOI
2001
A cognitive behavioural intervention to reduce sexually transmitted infections among gay men: randomised trial
Vol. 322 , No. 7300 , pp. -
620 views Abstract
2019
Diagnosis of obstructive coronary artery disease using computed tomography angiography in patients with stable chest pain depending on clinical probability and in clinically important subgroups: meta-analysis of individual patient data.
Vol. 365 , pp. l1945
578 views DOI Abstract
1988
Relation between falciparum malaria and HIV seropositivity in Ndola, Zambia
Vol. 297 , No. 6640 , pp. -
573 views Abstract
2008
GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations
Vol. 336 , No. 7650 , pp. -
475 views Abstract
2008
Incorporating considerations of resources use into grading recommendations
Vol. 336 , No. 7654 , pp. -
465 views Abstract
2018
Why we shouldn't use the term "illegal migrant".
Vol. 363 , pp. k4885
464 views DOI
2005
Cholinesterase inhibitors for patients with Alzheimer's disease: systematic review of randomised clinical trials
Vol. 331 , No. 7512 , pp. 321-327
464 views
2021
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
93,866 views DOI
2020
Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: reporting guideline.
Vol. 368 , pp. l6890
362 views DOI
2020
Health surveillance during covid-19 pandemic.
Vol. 369 , pp. m1373
302 views DOI
2020
Coronaviruses in animals and humans.
Vol. 368 , pp. m634
277 views DOI
2020
Military medical response of the French gendarmerie to terrorist events.
Vol. 368 , pp. m803
454 views DOI
2020
Short term association between ozone and mortality: global two stage time series study in 406 locations in 20 countries.
Vol. 368 , pp. m108
332 views DOI Abstract
2020
Maternal smoking during pregnancy and fractures in offspring: national register based sibling comparison study.
Vol. 368 , pp. l7057
360 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
31.0/100 · Poor
Ranked #21,074 of 29,341 scored
(33,995 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.

Overall Quality Score

31.0/100

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

30.9/100

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

63.0/100

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

70.0/100

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

5.6/100

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.