Indexed in Journament

jmir dermatology

EN

Journal Website Certificate of Indexing
Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
34.0 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #12,506 of 29,312 scored journals (34,012 indexed)
53 Articles
Scores higher than 57.3% 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 jmir dermatology
Abbreviated Name jmir dermatology
URL https://derma.jmir.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
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.4 30.4
Accessibility 35.0 20.4
Timeliness 0.0 5.8
Diversity 44.4 24.4
Innovation 70.0 25.7
Community Impact 7.9 5.8
Content Distribution 43.4 88.6
Content Quality — 55.5
Ethics & Transparency — 40.2
Editorial Standards — 33.4
Publication Regularity — 53.2
Geographic Reach — 30.8

Publications Per Year

Articles (53)

2019
Evaluating Web-Based Platforms and Traditional Methods for Recruiting Tattoo Artists: Descriptive Survey Research Study
Jessica LC Sapp;Jessica LC Sapp;Robert L Vogel;Joseph Telfair;Julie K Reagan;
Vol. 2 , pp. e14151--
693 views DOI Abstract
2018
Impact of an Intrainstitutional Teledermatology Service: Mixed-Methods Case Study
Trevor Champagne;Trevor Champagne;Peter G Rossos;Veronica Kirk;Emily Seto;
Vol. 1 , pp. e11923--
670 views DOI Abstract
2018
College Students’ Attitudes and Behaviors Related to Sun Safety and Appearance in Relation to Health Information-Seeking Behavior and Social Media Use: Cross-Sectional Study
Corey H Basch;Corey H Basch;Grace C Hillyer;Rachelle-Ann Romero;Sarah A MacLean;Danna Ethan;
Vol. 1 , pp. e10984--
643 views DOI Abstract
2018
Skin and Wound Map From 23,453 Nursing Home Resident Records: Relative Prevalence Study
Yunghan Au;Yunghan Au;Marcon Laforet;Kirsten Talbot;Sheila C Wang;
Vol. 1 , pp. e11875--
636 views DOI Abstract
2020
Evaluation of the Level of Evidence Supporting the Recommendations Constituting the American Academy of Dermatology Clinical Practice Guidelines: Cross-Sectional Analysis
Matt Vassar;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e17370-
631 views DOI Abstract
2018
Facebook Intervention for Young-Onset Melanoma Patients and Their Family Members: Pilot and Feasibility Study
Elliot J Coups;Elliot J Coups;Sharon L Manne;Sherry L Pagoto;Kevin R Criswell;James S Goydos and
Vol. 1 , No. 2 , pp. e3-
602 views DOI Abstract
2019
Determinants of the Intention to Use Teledermatology: Evidence From Dermatologists and Primary Care Physicians
Mercedes Sendín-Martín;Mercedes Sendín-Martín;Ana Jiménez-Zarco;Francesc Saigí-Rubió;Julian Conejo-Mir;Jose Juan Pereyra-Rodriguez;
Vol. 2 , pp. e14459--
600 views DOI Abstract
2020
Understanding Social Media Use and Engagement Among Dermatology Patients to Inform Dermatological Prevention and Care in Vietnam: Cross-sectional Study
Roger C M Ho;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e13424-
592 views DOI Abstract
2020
Skin Lesion Classification With Deep Convolutional Neural Network: Process Development and Validation
Amutha Al;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e18438-
576 views DOI Abstract
2020
Development of an Innovative Real-World Evidence Registry for the Herpes Simplex Virus: Case Study
Edward Meinert;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e16933-
557 views DOI Abstract
2020
Consumer Preference of Products for the Prevention and Treatment of Stretch Marks: Systematic Product Search
Benjamin K P Woo;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e18295-
527 views DOI Abstract
2020
A Psychosocial Support Website From the British Association of Dermatologists for People Living With a Skin Condition: Mixed Methods Evaluation
Andrew R Thompson;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e17052-
375 views DOI Abstract
2020
Delivering Clinical Skin Examination Education to Nurse Practitioners Using an Internet-Based, Microlearning Approach: Development and Feasibility of a Video Intervention
Lois J Loescher;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e16714-
375 views DOI Abstract
2020
Evaluation of Spin in the Abstracts of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Focused on the Treatment of Acne Vulgaris: Cross-Sectional Analysis
Matt Vassar;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e16978-
446 views DOI Abstract
2020
Information About Sunscreen on YouTube and Considerations for Sun Safety Promotion: Content Analysis
Frank M Perna;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e14411-
537 views DOI Abstract
2020
Development of an Innovative Real-World Evidence Registry for the Herpes Simplex Virus: Case Study
Edward Meinert;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e16933-
557 views DOI Abstract
2020
Skin Lesion Classification With Deep Convolutional Neural Network: Process Development and Validation
Amutha Al;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e18438-
576 views DOI Abstract
2020
Assessment of Patient Satisfaction With Dermatology Clinics According to Clinic Type: Mixed Methods Study
Mark Lemak;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e17171-
517 views DOI Abstract
2020
Understanding Social Media Use and Engagement Among Dermatology Patients to Inform Dermatological Prevention and Care in Vietnam: Cross-sectional Study
Roger C M Ho;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e13424-
592 views DOI Abstract
2020
LesionMap: A Method and Tool for the Semantic Annotation of Dermatological Lesions for Documentation and Machine Learning
Kamran Sartipi;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e18149-
367 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
34.0/100 · Poor
Ranked #12,506 of 29,312 scored
(34,012 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.
Journament

Overall Quality Score

34.0/100

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

30.4/100

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

35.0/100

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

44.4/100

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

43.4/100

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.