Minerva anestesiologica | Journament

Journal Ranking

#3645 / 33,958
📉 Poor
Overall Score
39.4/100
Score Breakdown
Engagement
31
Accessibility
35
Timeliness
50
Diversity
30
Innovation
40
Community Impact
34
Ethics & Transparency
0
Content Quality
0
Editorial Diversity
0
Publication Regularity
0
Geographic Reach
0
Updated 1 week ago

Minerva anestesiologica

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:
Indexings
ncbi ulakbim sci
Short Name Minerva Anestesiol
Abbreviated Name minerva anestesiol
ISSN 1827-1596
Aim and Scope
URL http://www.minervamedica.it/en/journals/minerva-anestesiologica/index.php
Author Instructions

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (17 total)

2017
evaluation of the effect of transdermal nitroglycerine patch on intrathecal dexmedetomidine as additive, on postoperative analgesia after abdominal hysterectomy
;Rama Chatterji;Anupama Gupta;Vinay Kumar Sharma;Chandra Shekhar Chatterji
Vol. 18 , No. 2 , pp. 51-55
445 views DOI Abstract
2020
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in critically ill patients: can we re-program the immune system? A primer for intensivists
Ferrari F;Visconti F;De Amici M;Guglielmi A;Colombo CNJ;Belliato M;Ronco C;;
, pp. -
440 views Abstract
2019
Effects of the anesthesia technique used during cesarean section on maternal-neonatal thiol disulfide homeostasis.
Akin, Fatma;Kozanhan, Betul;Deniz, Cigdem D;Sahin, Osman;Goktepe, Halime;Neselioglu, Salim;Erel, Ozcan;
387 views DOI Abstract
2017
Causes of sore throat after intubation: A prospective observational study of multiple anesthesia variables
Levin, P.
Vol. 83 , pp. 582-589
349 views DOI
2016
Prognostic value of the reactive oxygen species in severe sepsis and septic shock patients: a pilot study.
Montini, Luca;DE Sole, Pasquale;Pennisi, Mariano A;Rossi, Cristina;Scatena, Roberto;DE Pascale, Gennaro;Bello, Giuseppe;Cutuli, Salvatore L;Antonelli, Massimo;
Vol. 82 , No. 12 , pp. 1306-1313
335 views Abstract
2019
Tracheal amylase: a cheap way to predict ventilator associated pneumonia in patients with traumatic brain injury.
Rendon-Ramirez, Erick J;Colunga-Pedraza, Perla R;Herrera-Guerra, Alexis S;Cazares-Rendón, Erika C;González-Gutiérrez, Adriana;Ahumada-Pamanes, Carolina;Llaca-Díaz, Jorge M;Mercado-Longoria, Roberto;
313 views DOI
2001
[The mandrake root and the Viennese Dioscorides].
Peduto, V A;
Vol. 67 , No. 10 , pp. 751-66
300 views Abstract
2012
Aiming is not enough: you must hit
Heller AR;;
Vol. 78 , No. 12 , pp. -
257 views Abstract
2015
Urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin to hepcidin ratio as a biomarker of acute kidney injury in intensive care unit patients
Mårtensson J;Glassford NJ;Jones S;Eastwood GM;Young H;Peck L;Ostland V;Westerman M;Venge P;Bellomo R;;
Vol. 81 , No. 11 , pp. -
254 views Abstract
2014
Urinary neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin to hepcidin ratio as a biomarker of acute kidney injury in intensive care unit patients.
J Mårtensson,N J Glassford,S Jones,G M Eastwood,H Young,L Peck,V Ostland,M Westerman,P Venge,Rinaldo Bellomo;J Mårtensson;N J Glassford;S Jones;G M Eastwood;H Young;L Peck;V Ostland;M Westerman;P Venge;Rinaldo Bellomo;
Vol. 81 , No. 11 , pp. 1-
223 views
View All 17 Articles
39
Overall
Poor
31
35
30
40
34
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

39.4/100

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

33.5/100

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.

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.