the new zealand medical journal | Journament

Journal Ranking

#6200 / 33,982
📉 Poor
Overall Score
39.9/100
Score Breakdown
Engagement
31
Accessibility
15
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 2 weeks ago

the new zealand medical journal

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 n z med j
Abbreviated Name n z med j
ISSN 1175-8716
Aim and Scope
URL
Author Instructions

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (15 total)

2019
The 'H-Bug' epidemic: lessons from antibiotic-resistant staphylococcal outbreaks in New Zealand hospitals from 1955-1963.
Jowitt, Deborah;
Vol. 132 , No. 1502 , pp. 84-95
490 views Abstract
2020
A consensus statement on the use of angiotensin receptor blockers and angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors in relation to COVID-19 (corona virus disease 2019).
Talreja, Hari;Tan, Jasmine;Dawes, Matt;Supershad, Sharen;Rabindranath, Kannaiyan;Fisher, James;Valappil, Sajed;van der Merwe, Veronica;Wong, Lisa;van der Merwe, Walter;Paton, Julian;
Vol. 133 , No. 1512 , pp. 85-87
401 views Abstract
2019
The role of professional supervision for palliative care doctors in New Zealand: a quantitative survey of attitudes and experiences.
Barham, Debbie;de Beer, Wayne;Clark, Helen;
Vol. 132 , No. 1501 , pp. 10-20
362 views Abstract
2019
Music as a risk factor for primary spontaneous pneumothorax.
Grant, Kate;Beckert, Lutz;
Vol. 132 , No. 1501 , pp. 89-91
360 views
2019
A unified national cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk generator is required to address equity in the management of CVD risk in clinical practice in New Zealand.
Kerr, Andrew;Wells, Sue;Moffitt, Allan;Lund, Mayanna;Kreichbaum, Jim;Harwood, Matire;Jackson, Rod;
Vol. 132 , No. 1500 , pp. 89-94
355 views Abstract
2019
Pelvic mesh in colorectal pelvic floor surgery-implications of recent developments.
Collinson, Rowan J;Moot, Andrew R;
Vol. 132 , No. 1503 , pp. 93-99
341 views Abstract
2007
Can primary care patients be identified within an emergency department workload?
Elley CR;Randall PJ;Bratt D;Freeman P;;
Vol. 120 , No. 1256 , pp. -
307 views Abstract
2020
Quality assessment of a large primary GP skin cancer service in Auckland, New Zealand
Wen, D.
Vol. 133 , pp. 17-27
276 views
2019
Decriminalisation of abortion in New Zealand and Australia.
Johnson, Brooke R;Norman, Wendy V;Keogh, Louise;Sheldon, Sally;
Vol. 132 , No. 1501 , pp. 93-95
275 views
2020
Media representation of chronic pain in Aotearoa New Zealand-a content analysis of news media.
Devan, Hemakumar;Young, Jessica;Avery, Ceonne;Elder, Liv;Khasyanova, Yulia;Manning, Dominic;Scrimgeour, Morghan;Grainger, Rebecca;
Vol. 133 , No. 1508 , pp. 92-110
270 views Abstract
View All 15 Articles
40
Overall
Poor
31
15
30
40
37
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

39.9/100

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

30.5/100

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

15.0/100

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

36.5/100

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.