Indexed in Journament

cardiology research and practice

EN

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
37.2 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #14,689 of 20,297 scored journals (33,995 indexed)
27 Articles
Scores higher than 27.6% 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 cardiology research and practice
Abbreviated Name cardiology research and practice

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 cardiology research and practice
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.5 29.9
Accessibility 15.0 19.8
Timeliness 50.0 39.9
Diversity 30.0 30.0
Innovation 40.0 37.3
Community Impact 35.5 27.0
Content Distribution 60.8 85.1
Content Quality 54.2
Ethics & Transparency 39.5
Editorial Standards 32.5
Publication Regularity 51.6
Geographic Reach 30.0

Publications Per Year

Articles (27)

2019
Concordance between the Different Cardiovascular Risk Scores in People with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Psoriasis Arthritis
Vol. 2019
345 views DOI
2019
Leukodepleted Packed Red Blood Cells Transfusion in Patients Undergoing Major Cardiovascular Surgical Procedure: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Vol. 2019
322 views DOI
2019
Echocardiographic Findings in Patients with Atrial Septal Aneurysm: A Prospective Case-Control Study
Vol. 2019
318 views DOI Abstract
2005
lo que la corte verdaderamente dijo - ronald dworkin
, No. 1 , pp. ág. 33-45
254 views DOI Abstract
2015
la jagua de ibirico: criminal liability in face to the mining
, No. 11 , pp. ág. 95-106
247 views DOI Abstract
2010
2009
la aplicación de la prescripción gradual del delito en las causas sobre violaciones de derechos humanos
, No. 5 , pp. ág. 183-192
226 views DOI Abstract
2019
Triggers for Atrial Fibrillation: The Role of Anxiety
Vol. 2019
218 views DOI Abstract
2009
reseña de la jurisprudencia de la corte interamericana de derechos humanos (2008)
, No. 5 , pp. ág. 123-133
213 views DOI Abstract
2006
informe anual del centro de derechos humanos
, No. 2 , pp. ág. 347-356
196 views DOI
2019
Leukodepleted Packed Red Blood Cells Transfusion in Patients Undergoing Major Cardiovascular Surgical Procedure: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Vol. 2019
322 views DOI
2019
Concordance between the Different Cardiovascular Risk Scores in People with Rheumatoid Arthritis and Psoriasis Arthritis
Vol. 2019
345 views DOI
2019
Echocardiographic Findings in Patients with Atrial Septal Aneurysm: A Prospective Case-Control Study
Vol. 2019
318 views DOI Abstract
2019
Triggers for Atrial Fibrillation: The Role of Anxiety
Vol. 2019
218 views DOI Abstract
2015
2015
right to truth: dissapeared students in ayotzinapa, mexico
, No. 11 , pp. ág. 107-119
64 views DOI Abstract
2015
challenges and improvements in the rights of persons with disabilities: a global perspective
, No. 11 , pp. ág. 17-37
118 views DOI Abstract
2015
envío de artículos
, No. 11 , pp. ág. 211-ág. 211
131 views DOI
2015
la jagua de ibirico: criminal liability in face to the mining
, No. 11 , pp. ág. 95-106
247 views DOI Abstract
2013
pluralismo jurídico y derechos humanos
, No. 9 , pp. ág. 62-85
143 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
37.2/100 · Poor
Ranked #14,689 of 20,297 scored
(33,995 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.

Overall Quality Score

37.2/100

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

30.5/100

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

35.5/100

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.

Content Distribution

60.8/100

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.