Indexed in Journament

european journal of cancer care

ISSN 1365-2354· EN

Journal Website Certificate of Indexing
Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
37.2 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #7,672 of 29,330 scored journals (33,995 indexed)
28 Articles
Scores higher than 73.8% 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 eur j cancer care (engl)
Abbreviated Name eur j cancer care (engl)
ISSN 1365-2354
URL http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2354

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 30.3
Accessibility 20.0 18.3
Timeliness 0.0 12.6
Diversity 61.1 27.3
Innovation 70.0 28.9
Community Impact 13.6 9.7
Content Distribution 56.3 88.5
Content Quality — 55.5
Ethics & Transparency — 40.2
Editorial Standards — 33.4
Publication Regularity — 53.2
Geographic Reach — 30.8

Publications Per Year

Articles (28)

2019
Maternal breast cancer and communicating with children: A qualitative exploration of what resources mothers want and what health professionals provide.
Sinclair, Michelle;Schofield, Penelope;Turner, Jane;Rauch, Paula;Wakefield, Claire;Mann, G Bruce;Newman, Louise;Mason, Kylie;Gilham, Leslie;Cannell, Julia;Stafford, Lesley;
, pp. e13153
461 views DOI Abstract
2018
Development and preliminary testing of a brief clinical tool to enable daily monitoring of chemotherapy toxicity: The Daily Chemotherapy Toxicity self-Assessment Questionnaire.
Maguire, Roma;Kotronoulas, Grigorios;Donnan, Peter T;Paterson, Catherine;McCann, Lisa;Connaghan, John;Di Domenico, David G G;Kearney, Nora;
Vol. 27 , No. 6 , pp. e12890
432 views DOI Abstract
2015
Preventing the contamination of hospital personnel by cytotoxic agents: evaluation and training of the para-professional healthcare workers in oncology units.
Kieffer, C;Verhaeghe, P;Lagrassa, S;Grégoire, R;Moussaoui, Z;Casteras-Ducros, C;Clark, J E;Vanelle, P;Rathelot, P;
Vol. 24 , No. 3 , pp. 404-10
417 views DOI Abstract
2019
Awareness and knowledge of human papilloma virus in UK women aged 25 years and over: Results from a cross-sectional internet-based survey.
Kola-Palmer, Susanna;Dhingra, Katie;
, pp. e13181
415 views DOI Abstract
2019
From sweeteners to cell phones-Cancer myths and beliefs among journalism undergraduates.
Domínguez, Martí;Sapiña, Lucía;
, pp. e13180
411 views DOI Abstract
2017
e-TC: Development and pilot testing of a web-based intervention to reduce anxiety and depression in survivors of testicular cancer.
Heiniger, L E;Smith, A B;Olver, I;Grimison, P;Klein, B;Wootten, A;Abbott, J-A M;Price, M A;McJannett, M;Tran, B;Stockler, M R;Gurney, H;Butow, P N;
Vol. 26 , No. 6
372 views DOI Abstract
2019
Factors influencing the perception of protective isolation in patients undergoing haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A multicentre prospective study.
Biagioli, Valentina;Piredda, Michela;Annibali, Ombretta;Tirindelli, Maria Cristina;Pignatelli, Adriana;Marchesi, Francesco;Mauroni, Maria Rita;Soave, Sonia;Del Giudice, Elisabetta;Ponticelli, Elena;Clari, Marco;Cavallero, Sandra;Monni, Pierina;Ottani, Laura;Sica, Simona;Cioce, Marco;Cappucciati, Lorella;Bonifazi, Francesca;Alvaro, Rosaria;De Marinis, Maria Grazia;Gargiulo, Gianpaolo;
Vol. 28 , No. 6 , pp. e13148
370 views DOI Abstract
2015
the concept of csr in accounting theory and practice in poland: an empirical study
;Małgorzata Macuda;Łukasz Matuszak;Ewa Różańska
Vol. 2015 , No. 84(140) , pp. 115-138
370 views DOI Abstract
2019
Supporting her as the situation changes: A qualitative study of spousal support strategies for patients with breast cancer in China.
Gao, Li;Liu, Jun-E;Zhou, Xue-Ping;Su, Ya-Li;Wang, Pi-Lin;
, pp. e13176
369 views DOI Abstract
2020
The ENABLE study protocol: Understanding and characterising the value and role of self-management support for people living with cancer that is treatable but not curable.
Calman, Lynn;Radcliffe, Eloise;Berman, Richard;Demain, Sara;Restorick-Banks, Susan;Richardson, Alison;Wagland, Richard;Foster, Claire;
, pp. e13217
365 views DOI Abstract
2020
Seeking medical help for cancer among urban dwellers in Malaysia-Emotional barriers and awareness of cancer symptoms.
Su, Tin Tin;Azzani, Meram;Donnelly, Michael;Majid, Hazreen A;
, pp. e13232
231 views DOI Abstract
2020
The ENABLE study protocol: Understanding and characterising the value and role of self-management support for people living with cancer that is treatable but not curable.
Calman, Lynn;Radcliffe, Eloise;Berman, Richard;Demain, Sara;Restorick-Banks, Susan;Richardson, Alison;Wagland, Richard;Foster, Claire;
, pp. e13217
365 views DOI Abstract
2019
Factors influencing the perception of protective isolation in patients undergoing haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: A multicentre prospective study.
Biagioli, Valentina;Piredda, Michela;Annibali, Ombretta;Tirindelli, Maria Cristina;Pignatelli, Adriana;Marchesi, Francesco;Mauroni, Maria Rita;Soave, Sonia;Del Giudice, Elisabetta;Ponticelli, Elena;Clari, Marco;Cavallero, Sandra;Monni, Pierina;Ottani, Laura;Sica, Simona;Cioce, Marco;Cappucciati, Lorella;Bonifazi, Francesca;Alvaro, Rosaria;De Marinis, Maria Grazia;Gargiulo, Gianpaolo;
Vol. 28 , No. 6 , pp. e13148
370 views DOI Abstract
2019
From sweeteners to cell phones-Cancer myths and beliefs among journalism undergraduates.
Domínguez, Martí;Sapiña, Lucía;
, pp. e13180
411 views DOI Abstract
2019
Awareness and knowledge of human papilloma virus in UK women aged 25 years and over: Results from a cross-sectional internet-based survey.
Kola-Palmer, Susanna;Dhingra, Katie;
, pp. e13181
415 views DOI Abstract
2019
Supporting her as the situation changes: A qualitative study of spousal support strategies for patients with breast cancer in China.
Gao, Li;Liu, Jun-E;Zhou, Xue-Ping;Su, Ya-Li;Wang, Pi-Lin;
, pp. e13176
369 views DOI Abstract
2019
Is ignorance bliss, or is knowledge power? When cancer healthcare professionals become cancer patients
Lagad, A.
Vol. 28 , pp. 0-0
204 views DOI
2019
Prevalence of BRAF gene mutation in samples of primary and metastatic colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis.
Moosazadeh, Mahmood;Sadough, Azita;Afshari, Mahdi;Barzegari, Saeed;Janbabaee, Ghasem;Tabrizi, Reza;Akbari, Maryam;Alizadeh-Navaei, Reza;Hedayatizadeh-Omran, Akbar;Rostami-Maskopaee, Fereshteh;
, pp. e13160
364 views DOI Abstract
2019
Dietary changes adopted by Chinese colorectal cancer patients: A qualitative study.
Tang, Julia Wei Chun;Lam, Wendy Wing Tak;Ma, Anson Shin Ying;Law, Wai Lun;Wei, Rockson;Fielding, Richard;
, pp. e13159
303 views DOI Abstract
2019
Maternal breast cancer and communicating with children: A qualitative exploration of what resources mothers want and what health professionals provide.
Sinclair, Michelle;Schofield, Penelope;Turner, Jane;Rauch, Paula;Wakefield, Claire;Mann, G Bruce;Newman, Louise;Mason, Kylie;Gilham, Leslie;Cannell, Julia;Stafford, Lesley;
, pp. e13153
461 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
37.2/100 · Poor
Ranked #7,672 of 29,330 scored
(33,995 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.
Journament

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

30.4/100

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

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

61.1/100

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

13.6/100

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

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

56.3/100

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.