neurorehabilitation and neural repair | Journament

Journal Ranking

#669 / 33,971
📊 Below Average
Overall Score
43.3/100
Score Breakdown
Engagement
30
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 2 weeks ago

neurorehabilitation and neural repair

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
scopus ncbi ulakbim sci
Short Name neurorehabil neural repair
Abbreviated Name neurorehabil neural repair
ISSN 1552-6844
Aim and Scope
URL http://www.sagepub.com/journals/Journal201625/title
Author Instructions

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (8 total)

2020
The Role of Robotic Path Assistance and Weight Support in Facilitating 3D Movements in Individuals With Poststroke Hemiparesis.
Raghavan, Preeti;Bilaloglu, Seda;Ali, Syed Zain;Jin, Xin;Aluru, Viswanath;Buckley, Megan C;Tang, Alvin;Yousefi, Arash;Stone, Jennifer;Agrawal, Sunil K;Lu, Ying;
, pp. 1545968319887685
404 views DOI Abstract
2020
Brain Metabolism but Not Gray Matter Volume Underlies the Presence of Language Function in the Minimally Conscious State (MCS): MCS+ Versus MCS- Neuroimaging Differences.
Aubinet, Charlène;Cassol, Helena;Gosseries, Olivia;Bahri, Mohamed Ali;Larroque, Stephen Karl;Majerus, Steve;Martial, Charlotte;Martens, Géraldine;Carrière, Manon;Chatelle, Camille;Laureys, Steven;Thibaut, Aurore;
, pp. 1545968319899914
355 views DOI Abstract
2019
Cognition in Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery Research: Consensus-Based Core Recommendations From the Second Stroke Recovery and Rehabilitation Roundtable.
McDonald, Matthew W;Black, Sandra E;Copland, David A;Corbett, Dale;Dijkhuizen, Rick M;Farr, Tracy D;Jeffers, Matthew S;Kalaria, Rajesh N;Karayanidis, Frini;Leff, Alexander P;Nithianantharajah, Jess;Pendlebury, Sarah;Quinn, Terence J;Clarkson, Andrew N;O'Sullivan, Michael J;
, pp. 1545968319886444
351 views DOI Abstract
2019
Auditory, Phonological, and Semantic Factors in the Recovery From Wernicke's Aphasia Poststroke: Predictive Value and Implications for Rehabilitation.
Robson, Holly;Griffiths, Timothy D;Grube, Manon;Woollams, Anna M;
, pp. 1545968319868709
325 views DOI Abstract
2019
Relationship Between Spasticity and Upper-Limb Movement Disorders in Individuals With Subacute Stroke Using Stochastic Spatiotemporal Modeling.
Davidowitz, Isgav;Parmet, Yisrael;Frenkel-Toledo, Silvi;Baniña, Melanie C;Soroker, Nachum;Solomon, John M;Liebermann, Dario G;Levin, Mindy F;Berman, Sigal;
Vol. 33 , No. 2 , pp. 141-152
320 views DOI Abstract
2016
penerapan ahp (analitycal hierarchy process) untuk memaksimalkan pemilihan vendor pelayanan teknik di pt. pln (persero) area banyuwangi
;Harliwanti Prisilia
Vol. 14 , No. 1 , pp. 37-43
272 views Abstract
2019
tDCS-Enhanced Consolidation of Writing Skills and Its Associations With Cortical Excitability in Parkinson Disease: A Pilot Study
Broeder, S.
Vol. 33 , pp. 1050-1060
251 views DOI
2018
analisis capital budgeting sebagai alat pengambilan keputusan investasi: studi kasus
;Ananda Setiawan;Risa Alkurnia;Andika Puspita Sari
Vol. 16 , No. 2 , pp. 219-225
242 views DOI Abstract
43
Overall
Below Average
30
35
30
40
34
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

43.3/100

Tier: Below Average

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

29.8/100

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.