insights into imaging | Journament

Journal Ranking

#8785 / 33,982
📉 Poor
Overall Score
37.0/100
Score Breakdown
Engagement
31
Accessibility
35
Timeliness
50
Diversity
30
Innovation
40
Community Impact
37
Ethics & Transparency
0
Content Quality
0
Editorial Diversity
0
Publication Regularity
0
Geographic Reach
0
Updated 11 hours ago

insights into imaging

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
Certificate of Indexing
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
scopus ncbi
Short Name insights imaging
Abbreviated Name insights into imaging
ISSN 1869-4101
Aim and Scope
URL https://insightsimaging.springeropen.com
Author Instructions

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (47 total)

2019
Ethics of artificial intelligence in radiology: summary of the joint European and North American multisociety statement.
Geis, J Raymond;Brady, Adrian;Wu, Carol C;Spencer, Jack;Ranschaert, Erik;Jaremko, Jacob L;Langer, Steve G;Kitts, Andrea Borondy;Birch, Judy;Shields, William F;van den Hoven van Genderen, Robert;Kotter, Elmar;Gichoya, Judy Wawira;Cook, Tessa S;Morgan, Matthew B;Tang, An;Safdar, Nabile M;Kohli, Marc;
Vol. 10 , No. 1 , pp. 101
440 views DOI Abstract
2019
Validated imaging biomarkers as decision-making tools in clinical trials and routine practice: current status and recommendations from the EIBALL* subcommittee of the European Society of Radiology (ESR).
deSouza, Nandita M;Achten, Eric;Alberich-Bayarri, Angel;Bamberg, Fabian;Boellaard, Ronald;Clément, Olivier;Fournier, Laure;Gallagher, Ferdia;Golay, Xavier;Heussel, Claus Peter;Jackson, Edward F;Manniesing, Rashindra;Mayerhofer, Marius E;Neri, Emanuele;O'Connor, James;Oguz, Kader Karli;Persson, Anders;Smits, Marion;van Beek, Edwin J R;Zech, Christoph J;, ;
Vol. 10 , No. 1 , pp. 87
384 views DOI Abstract
2019
What the radiologist should know about artificial intelligence – an ESR white paper
Neri E.
Vol. 10 , pp. 0-0
370 views DOI
2019
Structured report data can be used to develop deep learning algorithms: a proof of concept in ankle radiographs.
Pinto Dos Santos, Daniel;Brodehl, Sebastian;Baeßler, Bettina;Arnhold, Gordon;Dratsch, Thomas;Chon, Seung-Hun;Mildenberger, Peter;Jungmann, Florian;
Vol. 10 , No. 1 , pp. 93
364 views DOI Abstract
2020
Attitudes and perceptions of UK medical students towards artificial intelligence and radiology: a multicentre survey
Sit, C.
Vol. 11 , pp. 0-0
363 views DOI
2020
Non-neoplastic hepatopancreatobiliary lesions simulating malignancy: can we differentiate?
Karaosmanoglu, Ali Devrim;Uysal, Aycan;Karcaaltincaba, Musturay;Akata, Deniz;Ozmen, Mustafa Nasuh;Kraeft, Jessica;Hahn, Peter F;
Vol. 11 , No. 1 , pp. 21
343 views DOI Abstract
2019
Advanced imaging in adult diffusely infiltrating low-grade gliomas.
Bulakbaşı, Nail;Paksoy, Yahya;
Vol. 10 , No. 1 , pp. 122
320 views DOI Abstract
2020
Artificial intelligence abstracts from the European Congress of Radiology: analysis of topics and compliance with the STARD for abstracts checklist.
Dratsch, Thomas;Caldeira, Liliana;Maintz, David;Dos Santos, Daniel Pinto;
Vol. 11 , No. 1 , pp. 59
299 views DOI Abstract
2013
coordination between the subject of physical education and extracurricular physical activities
;Antonio Campos Izquierdo;María Dolores González Rivera
, No. 14 , pp. 31-48
269 views DOI Abstract
2017
engagement and well-being university teacher. towards the delimitation of evaluative indicators
;Antonio Bernal Guerrero;Macarena Donoso González
, No. 20 , pp. 183-199
261 views DOI Abstract
View All 47 Articles
37
Overall
Poor
31
35
30
40
37
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

37.0/100

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

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

37.0/100

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.