Last updated on

Sports Medicine
Latest Impact Factor IF - Analysis · Trend · Prediction · Ranking


User Feedback

Journal Impact IF

2021-2022

11.136

30.2%

Journal Impact IF Trend

Researchain
One-click to visualize your research performance

Researchain
One-click to visualize your research performance

Researchain
One-click to visualize your research performance

Researchain
One-click to visualize your research performance

Popular Journals

Highly Cited Articles

Sports Medicine

High Impact Research Articles
Publication Title Author Listing
Publication Title Author Listing
· · ·
· · · ·
· · · · ·
· ·
· · ·
· · · · · ·
· · · · · ·
· · · · · ·
· · · · ·
· · · · · ·
· · · ·
·
· · · · ·
· · · · ·
· · · ·
· ·
· · · · ·
· · · · ·
· · ·
·
· · · ·
· · ·
· · · · · · · ·
·
· ·
· · · ·
· · · · ·
· · · · ·
· · · · ·
·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
· ·
·
· ·
· · · · · · · · · ·
·
· · · ·
· · · ·
· ·
· ·
· · ·
· · · ·
· · · · · ·
· · · · · ·
· · · ·
·

Highly Cited Keywords

Sports Medicine

High Impact Research Keywords

Journal Impact IF Ranking

Sports Medicine

Journal Impact IF Ranking
Subcategory Quartile Rank Percentile
Orthopedics and Sports Medicine Q1 2/262

Orthopedics and Sports Medicine 99%

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation Q1 2/206

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation 99%

Journal Impact IF Ranking

· In the Orthopedics and Sports Medicine research field, the Quartile of Sports Medicine is Q1. Sports Medicine has been ranked #2 over 262 related journals in the Orthopedics and Sports Medicine research category. The ranking percentile of Sports Medicine is around 99% in the field of Orthopedics and Sports Medicine.
· In the Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation research field, the Quartile of Sports Medicine is Q1. Sports Medicine has been ranked #2 over 206 related journals in the Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation research category. The ranking percentile of Sports Medicine is around 99% in the field of Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation.

Related Journals

Sports Medicine

Similar Journals

Sports Medicine

The 2021-2022 Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 11.136, which is just updated in 2022.

Sports Medicine Impact Factor
Highest IF
11.136
Highest Journal Impact IF

The highest Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 11.136.

Lowest IF
5.038
Lowest Journal Impact IF

The lowest Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 5.038.

Total Growth Rate
116.0%
IF Total Growth Rate

The total growth rate of Sports Medicine IF is 116.0%.

Annual Growth Rate
11.6%
IF Annual Growth Rate

The annual growth rate of Sports Medicine IF is 11.6%.

Journal Impact IF History

Sports Medicine

Journal Impact IF Trend

Year Journal Impact IF
Year Journal Impact IF
2022-2023 Check our Real-Time Impact Factor and Impact Factor Prediction Results
2020-2021 11.136
2019-2020 8.551
2018-2019 7.583
2017-2018 7.074
2016-2017 6.832
2015-2016 5.579
2014-2015 5.038
2013-2014 5.32
2012-2013 5.237
2011-2012 5.155
Journal Impact IF History

· The 2020-2021 Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 11.136
· The 2019-2020 Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 8.551
· The 2018-2019 Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 7.583
· The 2017-2018 Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 7.074
· The 2016-2017 Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 6.832
· The 2015-2016 Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 5.579
· The 2014-2015 Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 5.038
· The 2013-2014 Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 5.32
· The 2012-2013 Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 5.237
· The 2011-2012 Journal Impact IF of Sports Medicine is 5.155

Sports Medicine

Journal Key Metrics
Journal Title Sports Medicine
ISSN 0112-1642
ISSN (Online) 1179-2035
Publisher
Springer International Publishing AG
Publication Frequency
Monthly
Coverage
1984 - Present
Open Access
YES
Language
English
Highest Impact Factor (2011 - 2022) 11.136
Lowest Impact Factor (2011 - 2022) 5.038
Total Impact Factor IF Growth Rate (2011 - 2022) 116.0%
Avarage Impact Factor IF Growth Rate (2011 - 2022) 11.6%
Annual Impact Factor IF Growth Rate (2021 - 2022) 30.2 %
Publication Fees
Homepage
Submit Manuscript

Sports Medicine

Impact Factor 2022-2023 Prediction
Sports Medicine Impact Factor Predition System

Sports Medicine Impact Factor Prediction System is now online. You can start share your valuable insights with the community.

Predict Check All Preditions

What is Impact Factor?

The impact factor (IF) or journal impact factor (JIF) of an academic journal is a scientometric index calculated by Clarivate that reflects the yearly average number of citations of articles published in the last two years in a given journal. It is frequently used as a proxy for the relative importance of a journal within its field; journals with higher impact factor values are often deemed to be more important, or carry more intrinsic prestige in their respective fields, than those with lower values.

Sports Medicine | Academic Accelerator - About the Impact Factor

Impact factor is commonly used to evaluate the relative importance of a journal within its field and to measure the frequency with which the “average article” in a journal has been cited in a particular time period. Journal which publishes more review articles will get highest IFs. Journals with higher IFs believed to be more important than those with lower ones. According to Eugene Garfield “impact simply reflects the ability of the journals and editors to attract the best paper available.” Journal which publishes more review articles will get maximum IFs. The Impact Factor of an academic journal is a scientometric Metric that reflects the yearly average number of citations that recent articles published in a given journal received. It is frequently used as a Metric for the relative importance of a journal within its field; journals with higher Impact Factor are often deemed to be more important than those with lower ones. The Sports Medicine Impact Factor IF measures the average number of citations received in a particular year (2021) by papers published in the Sports Medicine during the two preceding years (2019-2020). Note that 2021 Impact Factor are reported in 2022; they cannot be calculated until all of the 2021 publications have been processed by the indexing agency. New journals, which are indexed from their first published issue, will receive an impact factor after two years of indexing; in this case, the citations to the year prior to Volume 1, and the number of articles published in the year prior to Volume 1, are known zero values. Journals that are indexed starting with a volume other than the first volume will not get an impact factor until they have been indexed for three years. Occasionally, Journal Citation Reports assigns an impact factor to new journals with less than two years of indexing, based on partial citation data. The calculation always uses two complete and known years of item counts, but for new titles one of the known counts is zero. Annuals and other irregular publications sometimes publish no items in a particular year, affecting the count. The impact factor relates to a specific time period; it is possible to calculate it for any desired period. In addition to the 2-year Impact Factor, the 3-year Impact Factor, 4-year Impact Factor, 5-year Impact Factor, Real-Time Impact Factor can provide further insights and factors into the impact of Sports Medicine.

History

The impact factor was devised by Eugene Garfield, the founder of the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). Impact factors are calculated yearly starting from 1975 for journals listed in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR). ISI was acquired by Thomson Scientific & Healthcare in 1992, and became known as Thomson ISI. In 2018, Thomson ISI was sold to Onex Corporation and Baring Private Equity Asia. They founded a new corporation, Clarivate, which is now the publisher of the JCR.

Use

The impact factor is used to compare different journals within a certain field. The Web of Science indexes more than 11,500 science and social science journals. Journal impact factors are often used to evaluate the merit of individual articles and individual researchers. This use of impact factors was summarised by Hoeffel:

Impact Factor is not a perfect tool to measure the quality of articles but there is nothing better and it has the advantage of already being in existence and is, therefore, a good technique for scientific evaluation. Experience has shown that in each specialty the best journals are those in which it is most difficult to have an article accepted, and these are the journals that have a high impact factor. Most of these journals existed long before the impact factor was devised. The use of impact factor as a measure of quality is widespread because it fits well with the opinion we have in each field of the best journals in our specialty....In conclusion, prestigious journals publish papers of high level. Therefore, their impact factor is high, and not the contrary.

Eugene Garfield

In brief, Impact factors may be used by:
  • Authors to decide where to submit an article for publication.
  • Libraries to make collection development decisions
  • Academic departments to assess academic productivity
  • Academic departments to make decisions on promotion and tenure.
As impact factors are a journal-level metric, rather than an article- or individual-level metric, this use is controversial. Garfield agrees with Hoeffel,but warns about the "misuse in evaluating individuals" because there is "a wide variation [of citations] from article to article within a single journal". Other things to consider about Impact Factors:
  • Many journals do not have an impact factor.
  • The impact factor cannot assess the quality of individual articles. Even if citations were evenly distributed among articles, the impact factor would only measure the interests of other researchers in an article, not its importance and usefulness.
  • Only research articles, technical notes and reviews are “citable” items. Editorials, letters, news items and meeting abstracts are “non-citable items”.
  • Only a small percentage of articles are highly cited and they are found in a small subset of journals. This small proportion accounts for a large percentage of citations.
  • Controversial papers, such as those based on fraudulent data, may be highly cited, distorting the impact factor of a journal.
  • Citation bias may exist. For example, English language resources may be favoured. Authors may cite their own work.
Moreover, informed and careful use of these impact data is essential, and should be based on a thorough understanding of the methodology used to generate impact factors. There are controversial aspects of using impact factors:
  • It is not clear whether the number of times a paper is cited measures its actual quality.
  • Some databases that calculate impact factors fail to incorporate publications including textbooks, handbooks and reference books.
  • Certain disciplines have low numbers of journals and usage. Therefore, one should only compare journals or researchers within the same discipline.
  • Review articles normally are cited more often and therefore can skew results.
  • Self-citing may also skew results.
  • Some resources used to calculate impact factors have inadequate international coverage.
  • Editorial policies can artificially inflate an impact factor.
Impact factors have often been used in advancement and tenure decision-making. Many recognize that this is a coarse tool for such important decisions, and that a multitude of factors should be taken into account in these deliberations. When considering the use of the impact factor (IF), keep these aspects in mind:
  • IF analysis is limited to citations from the journals indexed by the Web of Science/Web of Knowledge. Currently, the Web of Science indexes only 8621 journals across the full breadth of the sciences, and just 3121 in the social sciences.
  • A high IF/citation rate says nothing about the quality -- or even, validity -- of the references being cited. Notorious or even retracted articles often attract a lot of attention, hence a high number of citations. The notority related to the first publication on "cold fusion" is one such example.
  • Journals that publish more "review articles" are often found near the top of the rankings. While not known for publishing new, creative findings, these individual articles tend to be heavily cited.
  • The IF measures the average number of citations to articles in the journal -- given this, a small number of highly-cited articles will skew the figure.
  • It takes several years for new journals to be added to the list of titles indexed by the Web of Science/Web of Knowledge, so these newer titles will be under-represented.
  • It's alleged that journal editors have learned to "game" the system, encouraging authors to cite their works previously published in the same journal.
Comparing Journals Across Disciplines? Not a good idea! Using Impact Factors within a given discipline should only be done with great care, as described above. Using impact factor data to compare journals across disciplines is even more problematic. Here are some of the reasons:
  • Disciplines where older literature is still referenced, such as Chemistry and Mathematics, offer challenges to the methodolgy since older citations (older than two years) are not used to calculate the impact factor for a given journal. (Five-year impact factor analysis, which can be calculated using the Journal Citation Index database, helps smooth out this problem only to some degree.)
  • Different disciplines have different practices regarding tendency to cite larger numbers of references. Higher overall citation rates will bump upward impact factor measurements.
  • Where it's common for large numbers of authors to collaborate on a single paper, such as in Physics, the tendency of authors to cite themselves (and in this case, more authors) will result in increased citation rates.

Pros and Cons of the Impact Factor

Pros:

  • A vetted, established metric for measuring journal impact within a discipline.
  • Designed to eliminate bias based on journal size and frequency.
Cons:
  • Individual articles makes an uneven contribution to overall Impact Factor.
  • Impact Factor does not account for certain things, things like context (postive or negative citaion) and intentionality (self-citation).
  • The metric is proprietary to and bound by the contents of the Thomson Reuters database.
  • Citations, on which the Impact Factor is based, count for less than 1% of an article's overall use.

Criticism

Numerous critiques have been made regarding the use of impact factors. A 2007 study noted that the most fundamental flaw is that impact factors present the mean of data that are not normally distributed, and suggested that it would be more appropriate to present the median of these data. There is also a more general debate on the validity of the impact factor as a measure of journal importance and the effect of policies that editors may adopt to boost their impact factor (perhaps to the detriment of readers and writers). Other criticism focuses on the effect of the impact factor on behavior of scholars, editors and other stakeholders. Others have made more general criticisms, arguing that emphasis on impact factor results from negative influence of neoliberal policies on academia claiming that what is needed is not just replacement of the impact factor with more sophisticated metrics for science publications but also discussion on the social value of research assessment and the growing precariousness of scientific careers in higher education.
Experts stress that there are limitations in using impact factors to evaluate a scholar's work. There are many reasons cited for not relying on impact factor alone to evaluate the output of a particular individual. Among these are the following:

  • A single factor is not sufficient for evaluating an author's work.
  • Journal values are meaningless unless compared within the same discipline. Impact factors vary among disciplines.
  • The impact factor was originally devised to show the impact of a specific journal, not a specific scholar. The quality and impact of the author's work may extend beyond the impact of a particular journal.
According to Jim Testa, a researcher for ThomsonReuters Scientific, the most widespread misuse of the Impact Factor is to evaluate the work of an individual author (instead of a journal). "To say that because a researcher is publishing in a certain journal, he or she is more influential or deserves more credit is not necessarily true. There are many other variables to consider." (interview 6/26/2008 in Thomson Reuters blog entry)

Sports Medicine
Journal Profile

About

Sports Medicine focuses on definitive and comprehensive review articles that interpret and evaluate the current literature to provide the rationale for and application of research findings in the sports medicine and exercise field. Major topics covered by reviews published in the journal include: -Sports medicine and sports science, including performance research. -The medical syndromes associated with sport and exercise. -The practical role that clinical medicine plays in sport, through injury prevention and treatment. -The medical use of exercise for rehabilitation and health. -The application of physiological and biomechanical principles to specific sports. Sports Medicine also publishes: -Leading/current opinion articles providing overviews of contentious or emerging issues. -High-quality original research articles. Additional enhanced features (including slide sets, videos and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in Sports Medicine may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers in understanding important medical advances. All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts. Letters to the Editor are welcomed and will be considered for publication. None

ISSN
0112-1642
ISSN

The ISSN of Sports Medicine is 0112-1642 . An ISSN is an 8-digit code used to identify newspapers, journals, magazines and periodicals of all kinds and on all media–print and electronic.

ISSN (Online)
1179-2035
ISSN (Online)

The ISSN (Online) of Sports Medicine is 1179-2035 . An ISSN is an 8-digit code used to identify newspapers, journals, magazines and periodicals of all kinds and on all media–print and electronic.

Publisher
Springer International Publishing AG
Publisher

Sports Medicine is published by Springer International Publishing AG .

Publication Frequency
Monthly
Publication Frequency

Sports Medicine publishes reports Monthly .

Coverage
1984 - Present
Coverage

The Publication History of Sports Medicine covers 1984 - Present .

Open Access
YES
Open Access

Publication Fees
Publication Fees

Language
English
Language

The language of Sports Medicine is English .

Country/Region
Switzerland
Country/Region

The publisher of Sports Medicine is Springer International Publishing AG , which locates in Switzerland .

International Collaboration Trend

Sports Medicine

Cited Documents Trend

Sports Medicine

Total Publications
3287
Total Citations
363261

Annual Publication Volume

Sports Medicine

Annual Citation Record

Sports Medicine

Publications Cites Dataset

Sports Medicine

Year Publications Citations
Year Publications Citations
1953 2 0
1984 33 13
1985 34 47
1986 35 104
1987 30 191
1988 60 295
1989 50 396
1990 67 569
1991 57 800
1992 68 847
1993 69 986
1994 71 1359
1995 70 1515
1996 67 1956
1997 65 2051
1998 62 2674
1999 67 2839
2000 64 3733
2001 71 3918
2002 65 4514
2003 77 5625
2004 68 6749
2005 57 8134
2006 65 9434
2007 107 10903
2008 71 12610
2009 59 13810
2010 68 16020
2011 65 17860
2012 95 19906
2013 101 22934
2014 158 24612
2015 197 24976
2016 174 24058
2017 208 25222
2018 210 23772
2019 178 28159
2020 192 37268
2021 30 2402
Publications Cites Dataset

· The Sports Medicine has published 2 reports and received 0 citations in 1953.
· The Sports Medicine has published 33 reports and received 13 citations in 1984.
· The Sports Medicine has published 34 reports and received 47 citations in 1985.
· The Sports Medicine has published 35 reports and received 104 citations in 1986.
· The Sports Medicine has published 30 reports and received 191 citations in 1987.
· The Sports Medicine has published 60 reports and received 295 citations in 1988.
· The Sports Medicine has published 50 reports and received 396 citations in 1989.
· The Sports Medicine has published 67 reports and received 569 citations in 1990.
· The Sports Medicine has published 57 reports and received 800 citations in 1991.
· The Sports Medicine has published 68 reports and received 847 citations in 1992.
· The Sports Medicine has published 69 reports and received 986 citations in 1993.
· The Sports Medicine has published 71 reports and received 1359 citations in 1994.
· The Sports Medicine has published 70 reports and received 1515 citations in 1995.
· The Sports Medicine has published 67 reports and received 1956 citations in 1996.
· The Sports Medicine has published 65 reports and received 2051 citations in 1997.
· The Sports Medicine has published 62 reports and received 2674 citations in 1998.
· The Sports Medicine has published 67 reports and received 2839 citations in 1999.
· The Sports Medicine has published 64 reports and received 3733 citations in 2000.
· The Sports Medicine has published 71 reports and received 3918 citations in 2001.
· The Sports Medicine has published 65 reports and received 4514 citations in 2002.
· The Sports Medicine has published 77 reports and received 5625 citations in 2003.
· The Sports Medicine has published 68 reports and received 6749 citations in 2004.
· The Sports Medicine has published 57 reports and received 8134 citations in 2005.
· The Sports Medicine has published 65 reports and received 9434 citations in 2006.
· The Sports Medicine has published 107 reports and received 10903 citations in 2007.
· The Sports Medicine has published 71 reports and received 12610 citations in 2008.
· The Sports Medicine has published 59 reports and received 13810 citations in 2009.
· The Sports Medicine has published 68 reports and received 16020 citations in 2010.
· The Sports Medicine has published 65 reports and received 17860 citations in 2011.
· The Sports Medicine has published 95 reports and received 19906 citations in 2012.
· The Sports Medicine has published 101 reports and received 22934 citations in 2013.
· The Sports Medicine has published 158 reports and received 24612 citations in 2014.
· The Sports Medicine has published 197 reports and received 24976 citations in 2015.
· The Sports Medicine has published 174 reports and received 24058 citations in 2016.
· The Sports Medicine has published 208 reports and received 25222 citations in 2017.
· The Sports Medicine has published 210 reports and received 23772 citations in 2018.
· The Sports Medicine has published 178 reports and received 28159 citations in 2019.
· The Sports Medicine has published 192 reports and received 37268 citations in 2020.
· The Sports Medicine has published 30 reports and received 2402 citations in 2021.
· The total publications of Sports Medicine is 3287.
· The total citations of Sports Medicine is 363261.

Share Your Impact Factor Information with Community

Do you know the Latest Impact Factor of Sports Medicine? Share with the community!

Impact Factor

What is the Latest Impact Factor?

Data Source

Where do you get the information?



Impact Factor Data Source
Impact Factor Data Source
11.136 BioxBio

Thanks for sharing your information with us!

Sports Medicine - DOI: 10.1007/s40279-019-01180-z
Sex Dimorphism of VO2max Trainability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Candela Diaz-Canestro · David Montero ·

Medicine
PDF

Sports Medicine - DOI: 10.1007/s40279-019-01180-z
Sex Dimorphism of VO2max Trainability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Candela Diaz-Canestro · David Montero ·

Medicine
PDF

Sports Medicine - DOI: 10.1007/s40279-019-01198-3
Correction to: Relationships Between Dry-land Resistance Training and Swim Start Performance and Effects of Such Training on the Swim Start: A Systematic Review

Shiqi Thng · Simon Pearson · Justin W. L. Keogh ·

Medicine
PDF

Supplementary files (directly relevant but not essential to the conclusions of the paper) will undergo editorial review and should be submitted in a separate file with the original manuscript and with all subsequent submissions.

Front & Back Matter [10.1159/000500152]


Here, I review practical considerations for marine invertebrate researchers using RNA-sequencing, recent applications of population transcriptomics in marine invertebrates, current limitations of this approach, and future areas of study.

Applications and Future Directions for Population Transcriptomics in Marine Invertebrates [10.1007/s40610-019-00121-z]


Objectives: To review systematically and synthesize qualitatively the literature about perceived facilitators and barriers to physical activity in patients with axSpA and identify the types of physical activity preferred by these patients.

SAT0619 ATTITUDES AND PERCEPTIONS OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITY IN PATIENTS WITH SPONDYLOARTHRITIS: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW [10.1136/annrheumdis-2019-eular.4410]


Due to the systematic placement of interdigital slots on radiating EMSIW unit cell, the radiation intensity profile is significantly enhanced, which leads to higher directivity and notably enhanced gain (17.

EMSIW-Based Compact High Gain Wide Full Space Scanning LWA With Improved Broadside Radiation Profile [10.1109/TAP.2019.2918443]


The practical goal for patient psychotherapy was to develop psychoeducational training programs and guides in the field of psychological problems in cancer, addressed to specific groups of patients.

Coping strategies and sense of control in patients with oncological disease [10.5114/pm.2019.86532]


Methods and Results With a 4:1 ratio, 1501 patients with 1501 intermediate lesions were randomized into training versus test sets.

Angiography‐Based Machine Learning for Predicting Fractional Flow Reserve in Intermediate Coronary Artery Lesions [10.1161/JAHA.118.011685]

Scientific Writng Keywords