The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor
Abstract
The application of currently available sophisticated algorithms of citation analysis allows for the incorporation of the “quality” of citations in the evaluation of scientific journals. We sought to compare the newly introduced SCImago journal rank (SJR) indicator with the journal impact factor (IF). We retrieved relevant information from the official Web sites hosting the above indices and their source databases. The SJR indicator is an open‐access resource, while the journal IF requires paid subscription. The SJR indicator (based on Scopus data) lists considerably more journal titles published in a wider variety of countries and languages, than the journal IF (based on Web of Science data). Both indices divide citations to a journal by articles of the journal, during a specific time period. However, contrary to the journal IF, the SJR indicator attributes different weight to citations depending on the “prestige” of the citing journal without the influence of journal self‐citations; prestige is estimated with the application of the PageRank algorithm in the network of journals. In addition, the SJR indicator includes the total number of documents of a journal in the denominator of the relevant calculation, whereas the journal IF includes only “citable” articles (mainly original articles and reviews). A 3‐yr period is analyzed in both indices but with the use of different approaches. Regarding the top 100 journals in the 2006 journal IF ranking order, the median absolute change in their ranking position with the use of the SJR indicator is 32 (1st quartile: 12; 3rd quartile: 75). Although further validation is warranted, the novel SJR indicator poses as a serious alternative to the well‐established journal IF, mainly due to its openaccess nature, larger source database, and assessment of the quality of citations.—Falagas, M. E., Kouranos, V. D., Arencibia‐Jorge, R., Karageorgopoulos, D. E. Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. FASEB J. 22, 2623–2628 (2008)
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1999) · Cited by 12,854
Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses
Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A., & Pappas, G. (2008) · The FASEB Journal · doi:10.1096/fj.07-9492lsf · Cited by 5,039
Self-citationPrice, D. J. D. S. (1965) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.149.3683.510 · Cited by 3,122
Garfield, E. (1972) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.178.4060.471 · Cited by 2,788 · cited 1×
“The journal impact factor (IF), first conceived in 1955 by Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), has been extensively used in the past decades as an index of quality of scientific journals (3) and is based on citation analysis ( 4 ).”
BackgroundThe History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor
Garfield, E. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.295.1.90 · Cited by 2,770
Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science
Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J., & Wang, L. (2006) · Biomedical Digital Libraries · doi:10.1186/1742-5581-3-7 · Cited by 752
College Libraries and Chemical Education
Gross, P. L. K., & Gross, E. M. (1927) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.66.1713.385 · Cited by 649
Pinski, G., & Narin, F. (1976) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/0306-4573(76)90048-0 · Cited by 597
Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality?
(2003) · Europe PMC (PubMed Central) · Cited by 584
Fortnightly Review: How can impact factors be improved?
Garfield, E. (1996) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.313.7054.411 · Cited by 484
Cited by
A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases
Chadegani, A. A., Salehi, H., Yunus, M. M., Farhadi, H., Fooladi, M., Farhadi, M., & Ebrahim, N. A. (2013) · Asian Social Science · doi:10.5539/ass.v9n5p18 · Cited by 1,925
A Review of Theory and Practice in Scientometrics
Mingers, J., & Leydesdorff, L. (2015) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2015.04.002 · Cited by 1,002
Michael Hall, C. (2011) · Tourism Management · doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2010.07.001 · Cited by 634
Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics: observing Goodhart's Law in action
Fire, M., & Guestrin, C. (2019) · GigaScience · doi:10.1093/gigascience/giz053 · Cited by 351
Ivers, N. M., Taljaard, M., Dixon, S., Bennett, C., McRae, A., Taleban, J., Skea, Z., Brehaut, J. C., Boruch, R. F., Eccles, M. P., et al. (2011) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.d5886 · Cited by 193
Metadata
- Authors
- Falagas, M. E., Kouranos, V. D., Arencibia-Jorge, R., & Karageorgopoulos, D. E.
- Venue
- The FASEB Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-04-11
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 2623-2628
- ISSN
- 0892-6638 (ISSN-L)
- 1530-6860
- OpenAlex
- W2121493052
- Cited by
- 555
- References
- 39
- FWCI
- 23.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1096/fj.08-107938
- The paper
- Falagas, M. E., Kouranos, V. D., Arencibia-Jorge, R., & Karageorgopoulos, D. E. (2008). Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. The FASEB Journal. https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.08-107938
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
