Indexed in Journament

BMC family practice

ISSN 1471-2296· EN

Certificate of Indexing
Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
52.3 / 100
Journament Score
Average
Ranked #18 of 29,298 scored journals (34,012 indexed)
25 Articles
Scores higher than 99.9% 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 BMC Fam Pract
Abbreviated Name bmc family practice
ISSN 1471-2296

Quality Profile

6 of 12 dimensions measured
Engagement 31.5
Timeliness 70.0
Diversity 77.8
Innovation 70.0
Community Impact 12.9
Content Distribution 47.2
This journal Average of scored journals
Platform statistics — the free Journament Score AI Quality Analysis — separate paid product, ranks nothing

6 of the 12 dimensions could not be measured for this journal. They are left out entirely rather than plotted as zero, and with 6 dimensions measured there is not enough of a profile to draw as a shape.

Show the numbers
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 31.5 30.4
Accessibility — 22.5
Timeliness 70.0 3.0
Diversity 77.8 22.7
Innovation 70.0 24.1
Community Impact 12.9 4.2
Content Distribution 47.2 88.7
Content Quality — 55.5
Ethics & Transparency — 40.2
Editorial Standards — 33.4
Publication Regularity — 53.2
Geographic Reach — 30.8

Publications Per Year

Articles (25)

2011
Physicians' messages in problematic sickness certification: a narrative analysis of case reports
Carl, Rudebeck;Kristina, Alexanderson;Monika, Engblom;
Vol. 12 , No. 1 , pp. 18-
800 views Abstract
2019
Identifying policies and strategies for general practitioner retention in direct patient care in the United Kingdom: a RAND/UCLA appropriateness method panel study.
Chilvers, Rupa;Richards, Suzanne H;Fletcher, Emily;Aylward, Alex;Dean, Sarah;Salisbury, Chris;Campbell, John;
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 130
486 views DOI Abstract
2019
Adherence to treatment and related factors among patients with chronic conditions in primary care: a cross-sectional study.
Fernandez-Lazaro, Cesar I;García-González, Juan M;Adams, David P;Fernandez-Lazaro, Diego;Mielgo-Ayuso, Juan;Caballero-Garcia, Alberto;Moreno Racionero, Francisca;Córdova, Alfredo;Miron-Canelo, Jose A;
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 132
441 views DOI Abstract
2019
Patient involvement in assessing consultation quality: validation of patient enablement instrument (PEI) in Lithuanian general practice.
Skarbalienė, Aelita;Jurgutis, Arnoldas;Strandberg, Eva Lena;Pawlikowska, Teresa;
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 167
435 views DOI Abstract
2019
A global picture of family medicine: the view from a WONCA Storybooth.
Cubaka, Vincent K;Dyck, Clayton;Dawe, Russell;Alghalyini, Baraa;Whalen-Browne, Molly;Cejas, Gabriel;Gibson, Christine;
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 129
429 views DOI Abstract
2020
Evaluating implementation and impact of a provincial quality improvement collaborative for the management of chronic diseases in primary care: the COMPAS+ study protocol.
Vachon, Brigitte;Gaboury, Isabelle;Menear, Matthew;Pomey, Marie-Pascale;Roy, Denis;Houle, Lise;Breton, Mylaine;Duhoux, Arnaud;Émond, Valérie;Giasson, Guylaine;Kaczorowski, Janusz;Légaré, France;Lussier, Marie-Thérèse;Pluye, Pierre;Vanasse, Alain;
Vol. 21 , No. 1 , pp. 3
428 views DOI Abstract
2019
Uptake of a primary care atrial fibrillation screening program (AF-SMART): a realist evaluation of implementation in metropolitan and rural general practice.
Orchard, Jessica;Li, Jialin;Gallagher, Robyn;Freedman, Ben;Lowres, Nicole;Neubeck, Lis;
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 170
426 views DOI Abstract
2018
Enhancing delivery of osteoarthritis care in the general practice consultation: evaluation of a behaviour change intervention
Porcheret, Mark;Main, Chris;Croft, Peter;Dziedzic, Krysia;
Vol. 19 , No. 1 , pp. 1-7
403 views Abstract
2019
Communication practices for delivering health behaviour change conversations in primary care: a systematic review and thematic synthesis.
Albury, C;Hall, A;Syed, A;Ziebland, S;Stokoe, E;Roberts, N;Webb, H;Aveyard, P;
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 111
394 views DOI Abstract
2020
Job satisfaction, burnout, and turnover intention among primary care providers in rural China: results from structural equation modeling.
Wang, Haipeng;Jin, Yinzi;Wang, Dan;Zhao, Shichao;Sang, Xingang;Yuan, Beibei;
Vol. 21 , No. 1 , pp. 12
385 views DOI Abstract
2026
Simulating the flow of some non-Newtonian fluids with neural-like networks and stochastic processes
Canh‐Dung Tran
24 views DOI Abstract
2020
Determinants of referral of women with urinary incontinence to specialist services: a national cohort study using primary care data from the UK.
Gurol-Urganci, Ipek;Geary, Rebecca S;Mamza, Jil B;Iwagami, Masao;El-Hamamsy, Dina;Duckett, Jonathan;Wilson, Andrew;Tincello, Douglas;van der Meulen, Jan;
Vol. 21 , No. 1 , pp. 211
256 views DOI Abstract
2020
Evaluating implementation and impact of a provincial quality improvement collaborative for the management of chronic diseases in primary care: the COMPAS+ study protocol.
Vachon, Brigitte;Gaboury, Isabelle;Menear, Matthew;Pomey, Marie-Pascale;Roy, Denis;Houle, Lise;Breton, Mylaine;Duhoux, Arnaud;Émond, Valérie;Giasson, Guylaine;Kaczorowski, Janusz;Légaré, France;Lussier, Marie-Thérèse;Pluye, Pierre;Vanasse, Alain;
Vol. 21 , No. 1 , pp. 3
428 views DOI Abstract
2020
Job satisfaction, burnout, and turnover intention among primary care providers in rural China: results from structural equation modeling.
Wang, Haipeng;Jin, Yinzi;Wang, Dan;Zhao, Shichao;Sang, Xingang;Yuan, Beibei;
Vol. 21 , No. 1 , pp. 12
385 views DOI Abstract
2019
Patient involvement in assessing consultation quality: validation of patient enablement instrument (PEI) in Lithuanian general practice.
Skarbalienė, Aelita;Jurgutis, Arnoldas;Strandberg, Eva Lena;Pawlikowska, Teresa;
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 167
435 views DOI Abstract
2019
Development and validation of measurement tools for user experience evaluation surveys in the public primary healthcare facilities in Greece: a mixed methods study
Kaitelidou, Daphne;Economou, Charalambos;Galanis, Petros;Konstantakopoulou, Olympia;Siskou, Olga;Domente, Silviu;Boer, Dolf de;Boerma, Wienke G.;Groenewegen, Peter P.;
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 1-12
288 views Abstract
2019
Process evaluation of a cluster randomised intervention in Swedish primary care: using care managers in collaborative care to improve care quality for patients with depression
Svenningsson, I.;Petersson, E-L;Udo, C.;Westman, J.;Björkelund, C.;Wallin, L.;
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 1-8
209 views Abstract
2019
Uptake of a primary care atrial fibrillation screening program (AF-SMART): a realist evaluation of implementation in metropolitan and rural general practice.
Orchard, Jessica;Li, Jialin;Gallagher, Robyn;Freedman, Ben;Lowres, Nicole;Neubeck, Lis;
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 170
426 views DOI Abstract
2019
Effectiveness of a multimodal training programme to improve general practitioners' burnout, job satisfaction and psychological well-being
Barcons, C.
Vol. 20 , pp. 155
288 views DOI
2019
Tinkering at the margins: evaluating the pace and direction of primary care reform in Ontario, Canada.
Aggarwal, Monica;Williams, A Paul;
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 128
364 views DOI Abstract
Journament Score
52.3/100 · Average
Ranked #18 of 29,298 scored
(34,012 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.
Journament

Overall Quality Score

52.3/100

Tier: 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

31.5/100

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

Not yet measured

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

77.8/100

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

70.0/100

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

12.9/100

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

70.0/100

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

47.2/100

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.