jmir rehabilitation and assistive technologies | Journament

Journal Ranking

#7533 / 33,987
📉 Poor
Overall Score
39.5/100
Score Breakdown
Engagement
34
Accessibility
15
Timeliness
50
Diversity
30
Innovation
40
Community Impact
43
Ethics & Transparency
0
Content Quality
0
Editorial Diversity
0
Publication Regularity
0
Geographic Reach
0
Updated 2 weeks ago

jmir rehabilitation and assistive technologies

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
ncbi
Short Name jmir rehabil assist technol
Abbreviated Name jmir rehabil assist technol
ISSN 2369-2529
Aim and Scope
URL
Author Instructions

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (14 total)

2018
Adapting the Wii Fit Balance Board to Enable Active Video Game Play by Wheelchair Users: User-Centered Design and Usability Evaluation
Laurie A Malone;
Vol. 5 , No. 1 , pp. e2-
449 views DOI Abstract
2016
Community-Based Hip Fracture Rehabilitation Interventions for Older Adults With Cognitive Impairment: A Systematic Review
Paula M van Wyk;
Vol. 3 , No. 1 , pp. e3-
448 views DOI Abstract
2020
A Mobile App Directory of Occupational Therapists Who Provide Home Modifications: Development and Preliminary Usability Evaluation.
Nguyen, An Thi;Somerville, Emily Kling;Espín-Tello, Sandra Martina;Keglovits, Marian;Stark, Susan Lynn;
Vol. 7 , No. 1 , pp. e14465
443 views DOI Abstract
2017
Technologies to Support Community-Dwelling Persons With Dementia: A Position Paper on Issues Regarding Development, Usability, Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness, Deployment, and Ethics.
Meiland, Franka;Innes, Anthea;Mountain, Gail;Robinson, Louise;van der Roest, Henriëtte;García-Casal, J Antonio;Gove, Dianne;Thyrian, Jochen René;Evans, Shirley;Dröes, Rose-Marie;Kelly, Fiona;Kurz, Alexander;Casey, Dympna;Szcześniak, Dorota;Dening, Tom;Craven, Michael P;Span, Marijke;Felzmann, Heike;Tsolaki, Magda;Franco-Martin, Manuel;
Vol. 4 , No. 1 , pp. e1
418 views DOI Abstract
2021
Parents' Perspectives on a Computer Game–Assisted Rehabilitation Program for Manual Dexterity in Children With Cerebral Palsy: Qualitative Analysis of Expectations, Child Engagement, and Benefits
Nariman Sepehri;
Vol. 8 , No. 2 , pp. e24337-
383 views DOI Abstract
2020
Therapist-guided telerehabilitation for adult cochlear implant users: Developmental and feasibility study.
Völter, Christiane;Schirmer, Christiane;Hinsen, Dorothee;Roeber, Marieke;Dazert, Stefan;Bilda, Kerstin;
352 views DOI Abstract
2019
A Collaboration Between Game Developers and Rehabilitation Researchers to Develop a Web-Based App for Persons With Physical Disabilities: Case Study.
Terrill, Alexandra L;MacKenzie, Justin J;Reblin, Maija;Einerson, Jackie;Ferraro, Jesse;Altizer, Roger;
Vol. 6 , No. 2 , pp. e13511
351 views DOI Abstract
2019
Amputees' Attitudes Toward Participation in Amputee Support Groups and the Role of Virtual Technology in Supporting Amputees: Survey Study.
Nathan, Edward P;Winkler, Sandra L;
Vol. 6 , No. 2 , pp. 14887
330 views DOI Abstract
2021
Technology Acceptance and Usability of the BrainFx SCREEN in Canadian Military Members and Veterans With Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Mixed Methods UTAUT Study
Suzette Brémault-Phillips;
Vol. 8 , No. 2 , pp. e26078-
285 views DOI Abstract
2020
An Internet-Based Consumer Resource for People with Low Back Pain (MyBackPain): Development and Evaluation
Mandy Nielsen;
Vol. 7 , No. 1 , pp. e16101-
250 views DOI Abstract
View All 14 Articles
39
Overall
Poor
34
15
30
40
43
50
0
0
0
0
0
Journament

Overall Quality Score

39.5/100

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

34.2/100

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

42.5/100

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.