mustansiriyah journal of science | Journament

Journal Ranking

#2114 / 33,944
📉 Poor
Overall Score
37.6/100
Score Breakdown
Engagement
30
Accessibility
35
Timeliness
50
Diversity
30
Innovation
40
Community Impact
39
Ethics & Transparency
0
Content Quality
0
Editorial Diversity
0
Publication Regularity
0
Geographic Reach
0
Updated 1 week ago

mustansiriyah journal of science

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
doaj
Short Name mustansiriyah journal of science
Abbreviated Name mustansiriyah journal of science
ISSN 1814-635X
Aim and Scope
URL http://mjs.uomustansiriyah.edu.iq
Author Instructions

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (22 total)

2017
a survey of digital preservation challenges in nigerian libraries: librarians' perspectives
;Atanda Saliu Sambo;Enite Anita Urhefe;Stella Ejitagha
Vol. 12 , No. 1 , pp. -
369 views DOI Abstract
2018
Facile Synthesis, Characterization of New Quinazolinones with Different Azo Compounds, 1,2,3-Triazole Moieties and Evaluation Their Anti-bacterial Activity.
Khan, Ayad Kareem;
Vol. 28 , No. 3 , pp. 122-133
356 views Abstract
2018
Biodegradation Effect of some Bacterial Isolates on some Endocrine Disruptors (EDCS)
Al-Hashimi, Amna mohmmed Ali;
Vol. 29 , No. 2 , pp. 43-49
353 views Abstract
2013
here, kaptur this! identifying and selecting the infrastructure required to support the curation and preservation of visual arts research data
;Leigh Garrett;Marie-Therese Gramstadt;Carlos Silva
Vol. 8 , No. 2 , pp. 68-88
339 views DOI Abstract
2007
data curation standards and social science occupational information resources
;Paul Lambert;Vernon Gayle;Larry Tan;Ken Turner;Richard Sinnott;Ken Prandy
Vol. 2 , No. 1 , pp. 73-91
324 views DOI Abstract
2018
Fractal Image Compression Based on High Entropy Values Technique
Abbaas, Douaa Younis;
Vol. 28 , No. 2 , pp. 119-133
273 views Abstract
2009
one for many: a metadata concept for mixed digital content at a state archive
;Kai Naumann;Christian Keitel;Rolf Lang
Vol. 4 , No. 2 , pp. 80-92
227 views DOI Abstract
2013
informative provenance for repurposed data: a case study using clinical research data
;Richard Bache;Simon Miles;Bolaji Coker;Adel Taweel
Vol. 8 , No. 2 , pp. 27-46
219 views DOI Abstract
2014
data management in metagenomics: a risk management approach
;Filipe Ferreira;Miguel E. Coimbra;Raquel Bairrão;Ricardo Viera;Ana T. Freitas;Luís M. S. Russo;José Borbinha
Vol. 9 , No. 1 , pp. 41-56
204 views DOI Abstract
2008
bringing self-assessment home: repository profiling and key lines of enquiry within drambora
;Andrew McHugh;Seamus Ross;Perla Innocenti;Ravio Ruusalepp;Hans Hofman
Vol. 3 , No. 2 , pp. 130-142
195 views DOI Abstract
View All 22 Articles
38
Overall
Poor
30
35
30
40
39
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

37.6/100

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

30.3/100

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

38.5/100

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.