Indexed in Journament

critical care

ISSN 1466-609X· EN

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
39.0 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #2,062 of 29,298 scored journals (34,012 indexed)
17 Articles
Scores higher than 92.9% 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 critical care
ISSN 1466-609X

Quality Profile

5 of 12 dimensions measured
Engagement 30.9
Timeliness 0.0
Innovation 70.0
Community Impact 12.1
Content Distribution 76.1
This journal Average of scored journals
Platform statistics — the free Journament Score AI Quality Analysis — separate paid product, ranks nothing

7 of the 12 dimensions could not be measured for this journal. They are left out entirely rather than plotted as zero, and with 5 dimensions measured there is not enough of a profile to draw as a shape.

Show the numbers
Journament quality dimensions for critical care
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.9 30.4
Accessibility 22.5
Timeliness 0.0 3.0
Diversity 22.7
Innovation 70.0 24.1
Community Impact 12.1 4.2
Content Distribution 76.1 88.7
Content Quality 55.5
Ethics & Transparency 40.2
Editorial Standards 33.4
Publication Regularity 53.2
Geographic Reach 30.8

Publications Per Year

Articles (17)

2010
Revisiting the loading dose of amikacin for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock - Critical Care
Vol. 14 , No. 2 , pp. 1-10
323 views DOI Abstract
2015
The effects of a 2-h trial of high-flow oxygen by nasal cannula versus Venturi mask in immunocompromised patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: a multicenter randomized trial - Critical Care
Vol. 19 , No. 1 , pp. 1-8
306 views DOI Abstract
2008
Evaluation of SOFA-based models for predicting mortality in the ICU: A systematic review
Vol. 12 , No. 6 , pp. 1-13
305 views DOI Abstract
2018
Gut–kidney crosstalk in septic acute kidney injury
Vol. 22 , No. 1 , pp. 1-8
298 views Abstract
2007
Clinical review: Patency of the circuit in continuous renal replacement therapy - Critical Care
Vol. 11 , No. 4 , pp. 1-10
297 views DOI Abstract
2015
The effects of a 2-h trial of high-flow oxygen by nasal cannula versus Venturi mask in immunocompromised patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: a multicenter randomized trial
Vol. 19 , pp. -
291 views DOI Abstract
2006
The distinct clinical profile of chronically critically ill patients: a cohort study
Vol. 10 , No. 3 , pp. 1-9
287 views DOI Abstract
2020
The model of epidemic (COVID-19) prevention and control in rural of China
Vol. 24 , No. 1 , pp. 1-2
286 views
2016
Prevalence and risk factors of hypotension associated with preload-dependence during intermittent hemodialysis in critically ill patients
Vol. 20 , pp. -
286 views DOI Abstract
2005
Functional hemodynamic monitoring - Critical Care
Vol. 9 , No. 6 , pp. 1-7
286 views DOI Abstract
2020
The model of epidemic (COVID-19) prevention and control in rural of China
Vol. 24 , No. 1 , pp. 1-2
286 views
2019
How levosimendan can improve renal function?
Vol. 23 , pp. -
104 views DOI
2018
Gut–kidney crosstalk in septic acute kidney injury
Vol. 22 , No. 1 , pp. 1-8
298 views Abstract
2016
Prevalence and risk factors of hypotension associated with preload-dependence during intermittent hemodialysis in critically ill patients
Vol. 20 , pp. -
286 views DOI Abstract
2015
The effects of a 2-h trial of high-flow oxygen by nasal cannula versus Venturi mask in immunocompromised patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: a multicenter randomized trial
Vol. 19 , pp. -
291 views DOI Abstract
2015
The effects of a 2-h trial of high-flow oxygen by nasal cannula versus Venturi mask in immunocompromised patients with hypoxemic acute respiratory failure: a multicenter randomized trial - Critical Care
Vol. 19 , No. 1 , pp. 1-8
306 views DOI Abstract
2014
Citrate anticoagulation versus systemic heparinisation in continuous venovenous hemofiltration in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: a multi-center randomized clinical trial
Vol. 18 , No. 4 , pp. -
281 views DOI Abstract
2012
Bench-to-bedside review: Citrate for continuous renal replacement therapy, from science to practice
Vol. 16 , No. 6 , pp. 249-
101 views DOI Abstract
2011
Clinical review: Update on hemodynamic monitoring - a consensus of 16 - Critical Care
Vol. 15 , No. 4 , pp. 1-8
236 views DOI Abstract
2010
Revisiting the loading dose of amikacin for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock - Critical Care
Vol. 14 , No. 2 , pp. 1-10
323 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
39.0/100 · Poor
Ranked #2,062 of 29,298 scored
(34,012 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.

Overall Quality Score

39.0/100

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

Not yet measured

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

12.1/100

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

76.1/100

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.