Trials | Journament

Journal Ranking

#608 / 33,950
📊 Below Average
Overall Score
41.2/100
Score Breakdown
Engagement
31
Accessibility
35
Timeliness
50
Diversity
30
Innovation
40
Community Impact
35
Ethics & Transparency
0
Content Quality
0
Editorial Diversity
0
Publication Regularity
0
Geographic Reach
0
Updated 1 week ago

Trials

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
scopus ncbi doaj ulakbim sci
Short Name Trials
Abbreviated Name trials
ISSN 1745-6215
Aim and Scope
URL https://trialsjournal.biomedcentral.com
Author Instructions

Publications Per Year

Recent Articles (436 total)

2019
Design and rationale for a pragmatic cluster randomized trial of the Cardiovascular Health Awareness Program (CHAP) for social housing residents in Ontario and Quebec, Canada.
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 760
722 views DOI Abstract
2019
Tobacco cessation mobile app intervention (Just Kwit! study): protocol for a pilot randomized controlled pragmatic trial
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 1-7
500 views Abstract
2019
Promoting mental health and wellbeing in schools: examining Mindfulness, Relaxation and Strategies for Safety and Wellbeing in English primary and secondary schools: study protocol for a multi-school, cluster randomised controlled trial (INSPIRE).
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 640
492 views DOI Abstract
2018
Intravenous morphine versus intravenous paracetamol after cardiac surgery in neonates and infants: a study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Vol. 19 , No. 1 , pp. 1-11
464 views Abstract
2019
Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of Improving clinicians' diagnostic and communication Skills on Antibiotic prescribing Appropriateness in patients with acute Cough in primary care in CATalonia (the ISAAC-CAT study): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 740
438 views DOI Abstract
2019
Study protocol for a peer-led web-based intervention to promote safe usage of dating applications among young adults: a cluster randomized controlled trial.
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 102
434 views DOI Abstract
2019
Investigating the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of FITNET-NHS (Fatigue In Teenagers on the interNET in the NHS) compared to activity management to treat paediatric chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS)/myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME): amendment to the published protocol.
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 750
429 views DOI Abstract
2018
Evaluation of a novel device for the management of high blood pressure and shock in pregnancy in low-resource settings: study protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial (CRADLE-3 trial).
Vol. 19 , No. 1 , pp. 206
429 views DOI Abstract
2019
Improving risk perception and uptake of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) through interactive feedback-based counselling with and without community engagement in young women in Manicaland, East Zimbabwe: study protocol for a pilot randomized trial.
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 668
423 views DOI Abstract
2019
Prevention of Morbidity in Sickle Cell Disease (POMS2a)—overnight auto-adjusting continuous positive airway pressure compared with nocturnal oxygen therapy: a randomised crossover pilot study examining patient preference and safety in adults and children
Vol. 20 , No. 1 , pp. 1-15
417 views Abstract
41
Overall
Below Average
31
35
30
40
35
50
0
0
0
0
0

Overall Quality Score

41.2/100

Tier: Below 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

31.1/100

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

35.0/100

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.