toxicology mechanisms and methods | Journament

Journal Ranking

#2504 / 33,956
📉 Poor
Overall Score
39.8/100
Score Breakdown
Engagement
31
Accessibility
35
Timeliness
50
Diversity
30
Innovation
40
Community Impact
35
Ethics & Transparency
0
Content Quality
0
Editorial Diversity
0
Publication Regularity
0
Geographic Reach
0
Updated há 2 semanas

toxicology mechanisms and methods

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
Quality Widget - Embed on Your Website

Display your journal's quality scores on your website with our beautiful, self-contained widget. Choose between two embedding methods below.

One-Line JavaScript Embed (Recommended):
Advantages:
  • ✅ Simpler integration (just one line of code)
  • ✅ Better SEO (content is in same DOM)
  • ✅ No iframe limitations
  • ✅ Fully self-contained (no dependencies)
  • ✅ Works on any website regardless of CSS framework
  • ✅ Clickable badges link to full journal page
iFrame Embed Code:
Limitations:
  • ⚠️ Display-only (scores not clickable due to iframe constraints)
  • ⚠️ May have SEO limitations
  • ⚠️ Potential CORS/CSP issues on some websites
Preview:
Indexacoes
scopus ulakbim
Nome Abreviado toxicol mech methods
Nome Abreviado toxicol mech methods
ISSN 1537-6524
Objetivo e Escopo
URL http://www.informapharmascience.com/txm
Instrucoes para Autores

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (22 total)

2016
association of functional ability and benign prostatic hyperplasia with urinary incontinence in older korean men
;Jeongok Park;Gwi-Ryung Son Hong
Vol. 20 , No. 2 , pp. 137-142
596 views DOI Abstract
2015
inhibitory effect and possible mechanism of intraurethral stimulation on overactive bladder in female rats
;Yu Tian;Limin Liao;Jean Jacques Wyndaele
Vol. 19 , No. 3 , pp. 151-157
563 views DOI Abstract
2016
eight-year experience with botulinum toxin type-a injections for the treatment of nonneurogenic overactive bladder: are repeated injections worthwhile?
;Shannon HK Kim;David Habashy;Sana Pathan;Vincent Tse;Ruth Collins;Lewis Chan
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 40-46
523 views DOI Abstract
2016
clinical significance of the resistive index of prostatic blood flow according to prostate size in benign prostatic hyperplasia
;Se Yun Kwon;Jung Woo Ryu;Dai Hai Choi;Kyung Seop Lee
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 75-80
502 views DOI Abstract
2015
alpha-adrenoceptor antagonists improve memory by activating -methyl-d-aspartate-induced ion currents in the rat hippocampus
;Chang Hee Kim;Il Gyu Ko;Sung Eun Kim;Mal Soon Shin;Yeon Ho Kang;Jung Wan Cho;Key Moon Shin;Chang Ju Kim;Baek Vin Lim;Khae Hawn Kim
Vol. 19 , No. 4 , pp. 228-236
341 views DOI Abstract
2009
Detection of cocaine and benzoylecgonine in formalin fixed rat tissues Detection of cocaine Ahmet Hilal et al.
Hilal A.
Vol. 19 , pp. 422-426
337 views DOI
2017
extracellular vesicles as a source of urological biomarkers: lessons learned from advances and challenges in clinical applications to major diseases
;Ji-Young Choi;Sujin Kim;Hyo-Bum Kwak;Dong-Ho Park;Jae-Hyoung Park;Jeong-Seon Ryu;Chang-Shin Park;Ju-Hee Kang
Vol. 21 , No. 2 , pp. 83-96
291 views DOI Abstract
2015
clinical and pathological characteristics of hard nodules resistant to morcellation during holmium laser enucleation of the prostate
;Songzhe Piao;Min Soo Choo;Yue Wang;Young Ju Lee;Jungbum Bae;Seung-June Oh
Vol. 19 , No. 2 , pp. 90-98
290 views DOI Abstract
2016
role of 5´-amp-activated protein kinase activators in regulating nuclear factor kappa b signaling
;Tack Lee
Vol. 20 , No. 3 , pp. 171-171
267 views DOI
2015
the effectiveness of silodosin for nocturnal polyuria in elderly men with benign prostatic hyperplasia: a multicenter study
;Young Won Kim;Jinsung Park;Hong Chung;Hong-Wook Kim;Hyung Joon Kim;Jae Hung Jung;Won Tae Kim
Vol. 19 , No. 3 , pp. 190-196
259 views DOI Abstract
View All 22 Articles
40
Overall
Poor
31
35
30
40
35
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

39.8/100

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

30.7/100

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

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

35.0/100

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.

Ethics & Transparency Score

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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

0.0/100

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.