Indexed in Journament

revue de l'infirmiere

ISSN 1293-8505· EN

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
25.8 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #26,940 of 29,330 scored journals (33,995 indexed)
22 Articles
Scores higher than 8.1% 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 rev infirm
Abbreviated Name rev infirm
ISSN 1293-8505
URL https://www.journals.elsevier.com/revue-de-linfirmiere

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
Journament quality dimensions for revue de l'infirmiere
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.6 30.3
Accessibility 20.0 18.3
Timeliness 0.0 12.6
Diversity 25.6 27.3
Innovation 15.0 28.9
Community Impact 10.7 9.7
Content Distribution 69.5 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 (22)

2019
“Advanced practice is founded on strong generic nursing care”
Vol. 68 , pp. 26-27
359 views DOI
[Carbon monoxide poisoning, treatment and orientation].
Vol. 67 , No. 242 , pp. 18-20
340 views DOI Abstract
[Virtual reality and palliative care, a complement in the care provision].
Vol. 68 , No. 253 , pp. 38-40
339 views DOI Abstract
2019
[Nurse coordinator and in-home nursing care services].
Vol. 68 , No. 249 , pp. 21-22
335 views DOI Abstract
[The hyperbaric chamber, a hostile working environment].
Vol. 67 , No. 242 , pp. 23-24
335 views DOI Abstract
2019
[Treatment of hand-foot syndrome in the context of targeted therapies].
Vol. 68 , No. 250 , pp. 37-39
328 views DOI Abstract
2019
Placebo and professional practices in nursing care in hospital
Vol. 68 , pp. 42-43
320 views DOI
2018
Hypnosis and intensive care nursing, fusion or fiction?
Vol. 67 , pp. 23-24
316 views DOI
2018
Improve pharmacology training for nursing students
Vol. 67 , pp. 42-43
310 views DOI
[The lead nurse in a paediatric haemostasis unit].
Vol. 68 , No. 253 , pp. 19-20
308 views DOI Abstract
2019
“Advanced practice is founded on strong generic nursing care”
Vol. 68 , pp. 26-27
359 views DOI
2019
Placebo and professional practices in nursing care in hospital
Vol. 68 , pp. 42-43
320 views DOI
2019
[Between tradition and modernity, traditional medicine and nursing in Ivory Coast].
Vol. 68 , No. 247 , pp. 27-29
195 views DOI Abstract
2019
[Simulation in health care in nurse training institutes, from theory to practice].
Vol. 68 , No. 247 , pp. 41-42
106 views DOI Abstract
2019
[Nurse coordinator and in-home nursing care services].
Vol. 68 , No. 249 , pp. 21-22
335 views DOI Abstract
2019
[Simulation, a pedagogical method appreciated by student nurses].
Vol. 68 , No. 249 , pp. 40-41
162 views DOI Abstract
2019
[Treatment of hand-foot syndrome in the context of targeted therapies].
Vol. 68 , No. 250 , pp. 37-39
328 views DOI Abstract
2019
[Assessment of students' knowledge and pathological processes].
Vol. 68 , No. 250 , pp. 40-41
171 views DOI Abstract
2019
Vol. 68 , No. 250 , pp. 51-52
29 views DOI
2019
Vol. 68 , No. 251 , pp. 40-41
31 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
25.8/100 · Poor
Ranked #26,940 of 29,330 scored
(33,995 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.

Overall Quality Score

25.8/100

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

30.6/100

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

25.6/100

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

15.0/100

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

10.7/100

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

69.5/100

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.