Indexed in Journament

Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA

ISSN 1527-974X· EN

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
35.7 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #8,239 of 29,298 scored journals (34,018 indexed)
78 Articles
Scores higher than 71.8% 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 J Am Med Inform Assoc
Abbreviated Name j am med inform assoc
ISSN 1527-974X
URL http://www.jamia.org

Quality Profile

7 of 12 dimensions measured
This journal Average of scored journals
Platform statistics — the free Journament Score AI Quality Analysis — separate paid product, ranks nothing

5 of the 12 dimensions could not be measured for this journal. They are left as gaps in the shape rather than plotted as zero.

Show the numbers
Journament quality dimensions for Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.9 30.5
Accessibility 20.0 23.1
Timeliness 70.0 3.0
Diversity 23.0 25.9
Innovation 70.0 24.1
Community Impact 8.6 5.7
Content Distribution 27.2 89.4
Content Quality — 55.1
Ethics & Transparency — 40.5
Editorial Standards — 33.0
Publication Regularity — 52.9
Geographic Reach — 30.4

Publications Per Year

Articles (78)

2019
Cohort selection for clinical trials: n2c2 2018 shared task track 1.
567 views DOI Abstract
1970
Workarounds to barcode medication administration systems: their occurrences, causes, and threats to patient safety
Vol. 15 , No. 4 , pp. -
505 views Abstract
2019
Learning from electronic health records across multiple sites: A communication-efficient and privacy-preserving distributed algorithm.
491 views DOI Abstract
2019
Leaf: an open-source, model-agnostic, data-driven web application for cohort discovery and translational biomedical research.
491 views DOI Abstract
2019
Development and application of a high throughput natural language processing architecture to convert all clinical documents in a clinical data warehouse into standardized medical vocabularies.
Vol. 26 , pp. 1364-1369
466 views DOI Abstract
2017
Blockchain distributed ledger technologies for biomedical and health care applications.
Vol. 24 , No. 6 , pp. 1211-1220
466 views DOI Abstract
2019
Detecting conversation topics in primary care office visits from transcripts of patient-provider interactions.
458 views DOI Abstract
2019
New approaches to cohort selection.
Vol. 26 , No. 11 , pp. 1161-1162
449 views DOI
2019
Challenges and opportunities using online portals to recruit diverse patients to behavioral trials.
420 views DOI Abstract
2019
High-throughput multimodal automated phenotyping (MAP) with application to PheWAS.
Vol. 26 , No. 11 , pp. 1255-1262
414 views DOI Abstract
2026
Translating machine learning predictions into meaningful risk estimates to support clinical decisions: a post hoc analysis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease adverse outcomes using unified auto clinical scores
55 views DOI Abstract
2026
Medical code embeddings from claims-based co-occurrences: a unified semantic space for ICD-10 diagnoses and ATC medications
58 views DOI Abstract
2026
PDA (Privacy-Preserving Distributed Algorithms) in action: ten principles for high-quality multi-site clinical evidence generation
63 views DOI Abstract
2026
Reporting follow-up budgets for diagnostic and predictive AI
62 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
35.7/100 · Poor
Ranked #8,239 of 29,298 scored
(34,018 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.

Overall Quality Score

35.7/100

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

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

20.0/100

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

23.0/100

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

8.6/100

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

70.0/100

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

27.2/100

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.