American Journal of Health Promotion
Etki Faktörü - Analiz · Akım · Sıralama · Tahmin


New

Etki Faktörü

2020-2021

2.87

28.6%

Etki Faktörü 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

Highly Cited Articles

American Journal of Health Promotion

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

Highly Cited Keywords

American Journal of Health Promotion

High Impact Research Keywords

Related Journals

Popular Journals

American Journal of Health Promotion

The 2020-2021 Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 2.87, which is just updated in 2021.

American Journal of Health Promotion Impact Factor
Highest IF
2.87
Highest Etki Faktörü

The highest Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 2.87.

Lowest IF
1.562
Lowest Etki Faktörü

The lowest Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 1.562.

Total Growth Rate
20.9%
IF Total Growth Rate

The total growth rate of American Journal of Health Promotion IF is 20.9%.

Annual Growth Rate
2.1%
IF Annual Growth Rate

The annual growth rate of American Journal of Health Promotion IF is 2.1%.

Etki Faktörü Ranking

Subcategory Quartile Rank Percentile
Health (social science) Q1 52/293

Health (social science) 82%

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health Q2 143/526

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health 72%

Etki Faktörü Ranking

· In the Health (social science) research field, the Quartile of American Journal of Health Promotion is Q1. American Journal of Health Promotion has been ranked #52 over 293 related journals in the Health (social science) research category. The ranking percentile of American Journal of Health Promotion is around 82% in the field of Health (social science).
· In the Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health research field, the Quartile of American Journal of Health Promotion is Q2. American Journal of Health Promotion has been ranked #143 over 526 related journals in the Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health research category. The ranking percentile of American Journal of Health Promotion is around 72% in the field of Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health.

American Journal of Health Promotion Impact Factor 2021-2022 Prediction

American Journal of Health Promotion Impact Factor Predition System

American Journal of Health Promotion Impact Factor Prediction System is now online. You can start share your valuable insights with the community.

Predict Check All Preditions
Total Publications
2613
Total Citations
99667

Annual Publication Volume

Annual Citation Record

International Collaboration Trend

Cited Documents Trend

Etki Faktörü History

Year Etki Faktörü
Year Etki Faktörü
2020-2021 2.87
2019-2020 2.232
2018-2019 2.636
2017-2018 1.957
2016-2017 2.586
2015-2016 2.033
2014-2015 1.562
2013-2014 1.762
2012-2013 1.754
2011-2012 2.373
Etki Faktörü History

· The 2020-2021 Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 2.87
· The 2019-2020 Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 2.232
· The 2018-2019 Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 2.636
· The 2017-2018 Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 1.957
· The 2016-2017 Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 2.586
· The 2015-2016 Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 2.033
· The 2014-2015 Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 1.562
· The 2013-2014 Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 1.762
· The 2012-2013 Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 1.754
· The 2011-2012 Etki Faktörü of American Journal of Health Promotion is 2.373

Publications Cites Dataset

Year Publications Citations
Year Publications Citations
1986 29 21
1987 26 29
1988 30 52
1989 27 72
1990 57 122
1991 52 173
1992 53 243
1993 53 396
1994 57 391
1995 55 428
1996 46 604
1997 59 715
1998 41 978
1999 51 1174
2000 49 1423
2001 54 1672
2002 32 1882
2003 61 2199
2004 61 2607
2005 67 3118
2006 69 3751
2007 81 3971
2008 74 4625
2009 67 5044
2010 76 5139
2011 110 5771
2012 85 6076
2013 103 6271
2014 121 6538
2015 116 6219
2016 82 5348
2017 62 4996
2018 207 4590
2019 171 5226
2020 202 7389
2021 27 414
Publications Cites Dataset

· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 29 reports and received 21 citations in 1986.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 26 reports and received 29 citations in 1987.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 30 reports and received 52 citations in 1988.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 27 reports and received 72 citations in 1989.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 57 reports and received 122 citations in 1990.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 52 reports and received 173 citations in 1991.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 53 reports and received 243 citations in 1992.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 53 reports and received 396 citations in 1993.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 57 reports and received 391 citations in 1994.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 55 reports and received 428 citations in 1995.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 46 reports and received 604 citations in 1996.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 59 reports and received 715 citations in 1997.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 41 reports and received 978 citations in 1998.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 51 reports and received 1174 citations in 1999.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 49 reports and received 1423 citations in 2000.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 54 reports and received 1672 citations in 2001.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 32 reports and received 1882 citations in 2002.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 61 reports and received 2199 citations in 2003.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 61 reports and received 2607 citations in 2004.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 67 reports and received 3118 citations in 2005.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 69 reports and received 3751 citations in 2006.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 81 reports and received 3971 citations in 2007.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 74 reports and received 4625 citations in 2008.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 67 reports and received 5044 citations in 2009.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 76 reports and received 5139 citations in 2010.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 110 reports and received 5771 citations in 2011.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 85 reports and received 6076 citations in 2012.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 103 reports and received 6271 citations in 2013.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 121 reports and received 6538 citations in 2014.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 116 reports and received 6219 citations in 2015.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 82 reports and received 5348 citations in 2016.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 62 reports and received 4996 citations in 2017.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 207 reports and received 4590 citations in 2018.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 171 reports and received 5226 citations in 2019.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 202 reports and received 7389 citations in 2020.
· The American Journal of Health Promotion has published 27 reports and received 414 citations in 2021.
· The total publications of American Journal of Health Promotion is 2613.
· The total citations of American Journal of Health Promotion is 99667.

American Journal of Health Promotion
Journal Profile
American Journal of Health Promotion | Academic Accelerator - About the Journal

About

The editorial goal of the American Journal of Health Promotion is to provide a forum for exchange among the many disciplines involved in health promotion and an interface between researchers and practitioners. None

ISSN
0890-1171
ISSN

The ISSN of American Journal of Health Promotion is 0890-1171 . 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)
-
ISSN (Online)

The ISSN (Online) of American Journal of Health Promotion is - . 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
SAGE Publications Inc.
Publisher

American Journal of Health Promotion is published by SAGE Publications Inc. .

Publication Frequency
Other
Publication Frequency

American Journal of Health Promotion publishes reports Other .

Coverage
1986 - Present
Coverage

The Publication History of American Journal of Health Promotion covers 1986 - Present .

Open Access
NO
Open Access

Publication Fee
Review
Publication Fee

Language
English
Language

The language of American Journal of Health Promotion is English .

Country/Region
United States
Country/Region

The publisher of American Journal of Health Promotion is SAGE Publications Inc. , which locates in United States .

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.

American Journal of Health Promotion | 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 American Journal of Health Promotion Impact Factor IF measures the average number of citations received in a particular year (2020) by papers published in the American Journal of Health Promotion during the two preceding years (2018-2019). Note that 2020 Impact Factor are reported in 2021; they cannot be calculated until all of the 2020 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 American Journal of Health Promotion.

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)