Editorial CSIC

Madrid, Spain · Member ID: 2373 · 44,363 total works

Global Rank

#1,901

of 28,608

Percentile

Top 7%

of all publishers

View Full Leaderboard

Nearby in Rankings:

#1899Serbian Association for Cancer Research(43 pts)#1900Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH(42 pts)#1902National Taiwan University(42 pts)#1903Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery(42 pts)

Nexus Score

42/ 100

+23 points vs historical

Score Breakdown by Era

Current

Last 2 years

#1,067

2,547 works

Backfile

Older than 2 years

#1,901

41,816 works

Ranked #1,067 for recent publications vs #1,901 overall — improving with recent work

Dimension Breakdown

Provenance

References, update policies, similarity check

11.2 / 25

People

ORCID coverage

10.6 / 20

Organizations

Affiliations and ROR IDs

0.0 / 15

Funding

Funder registry and award numbers

3.2 / 20

Access

Licenses, full-text links, abstracts

17.2 / 20

Dimension Profile

Visual overview of metadata coverage across all five dimensions.

Score by Content Type

Scores calculated separately for each content type registered with Crossref. The aggregate score above includes all types.

Content Type	Score	Grade	Prov	People	Orgs	Fund	Access
Journal ArticlesTOP	35	D	43%	22%	0%	5%	95%
Database	5	F	0%	0%	33%	0%	0%
Journal Issues	0	F	0%	0%	0%	0%	0%

Non-article content types (reviews, components, corrections) typically have lower metadata coverage, which can reduce the aggregate score above.

Want to compare by content type? The leaderboard supports filtering by content type — use it to see how publishers rank for journal articles, peer reviews, or other types individually.

Detailed Metrics

Metric	Coverage	Points	Status
References provenance	55%	8.3 / 15	Good
Update Policies provenance	0%	0.0 / 5	Poor
Similarity Check provenance	92%	4.6 / 5	Excellent
ORCID Coverage people	90%	18.0 / 20	Excellent
Affiliations (Text) organizations	0%	0.0 / 5	Poor
ROR IDs organizations	0%	0.0 / 10	Poor
Funder Registry funding	29%	2.9 / 10	Needs Work
Award Numbers funding	29%	2.9 / 10	Needs Work
Licenses access	93%	6.5 / 7	Excellent
Full-text Links access	92%	6.5 / 7	Excellent
Abstracts access	67%	4.0 / 6	Good

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

Small metadata improvements can significantly boost your score. Here are the highest-impact changes you can make:

Improve Funding

+13 pts potential

Include funder information using Open Funder Registry IDs and grant/award numbers.

Current: 16% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve Organizations

+12 pts potential

Add author affiliations with ROR IDs. The ROR API can help match institution names to IDs.

Current: 0% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve Provenance

+9 pts potential

Add reference lists to your DOI deposits. Even partial references help establish citation links.

Current: 45% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Pro Tip: Focus on your current (recent) publications first. Improving metadata on new deposits is easier than updating backfiles, and it will immediately improve your "current" coverage scores.

Editorial CSIC

Score Breakdown by Era

Dimension Breakdown

Dimension Profile

Score by Content Type

Detailed Metrics

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

Improve Funding

Improve Organizations

Improve Provenance

Improvement Recommendations

Add ROR IDs for Affiliations

Include Author Affiliations

Enable Crossmark

Deposit Complete References

Add Funder Information

About This Score

Crossref Reports

Share Results