Home › Journal SEO Ranking › Public ranking
Public ranking · v3

Journal SEO Ranking — Top 50 Biomedical Journals

A reproducible compliance audit of how well the top 50 biomedical journal platforms are technically set up for search and AI-citation discoverability. Every score derives from direct HTML inspection of sample articles, fetched as Googlebot, against 17 checks split across three weighted categories: on-page article SEO (60%), registry presence (20%), and crawler-friendliness (20%). Read the methodology for what each check measures and how the dual-UA fetch chain works. Click any column header to sort.

Version 3.0 Captured 14 April 2026 CC-BY 4.0
50Journals scored
17Checks per journal
1Excellent
20Good
26Adequate
3Poor
How to read this ranking. The composite (0–100) is a weighted sum of three categories: On-page article SEO (60%) — Highwire citation_* meta, Schema.org Article JSON-LD, OpenGraph, Twitter card, canonical URL, <title>, meta description, h1, semantic HTML + alt text, abstract-in-body. Registry presence (20%) — CrossRef coverage, MEDLINE indexing, DOAJ membership (closed-access auto-pass), OpenAlex works count. Crawler-friendliness (20%) — robots.txt AI-bot allowances (GPTBot/ClaudeBot/PerplexityBot/Google-Extended), llms.txt presence, sitemap discovery. The ranking is by inspection of HTML against documented requirements, not a prediction of any downstream retrieval outcome. The Research-UA reach column is the legacy "did the article respond to a polite scholarly crawler" datum — it is NOT scored, but is preserved for the crawler-blocking analysis.

Journals — Top 50 biomedical by h-index

All 50 journals scored on the same 17 checks. Sortable by clicking any column. Hover over a row to highlight; click a DOI link to inspect the actual sample article we scored.

Excellent (85+)
Good (70–84)
Adequate (50–69)
Poor (<50)
# Journal Publisher Composite Tier On-page Registry Crawler h-idx OA DOAJ k Sample Research UA %
1 The EMBO Journal Springer Nature 85.4 Excellent 87 100 67 563 Yes Yes 3 DOI 100
2 The Journal of Immunology American Association of Immunologists 80.1 Good 78 100 67 528 No — 3 DOI 0
3 PLoS ONE Public Library of Science 79.1 Good 76 100 67 592 Yes Yes 3 DOI 100
4 Nature Genetics Nature Portfolio 78.9 Good 87 100 33 781 No — 3 DOI 100
5 Nature Medicine Nature Portfolio 78.9 Good 87 100 33 757 No — 3 DOI 100
6 Nature Biotechnology Nature Portfolio 78.9 Good 87 100 33 629 No — 3 DOI 100
7 Nature Neuroscience Nature Portfolio 78.9 Good 87 100 33 598 No — 3 DOI 100
8 Nature Immunology Nature Portfolio 78.9 Good 87 100 33 520 No — 3 DOI 100
9 Bioinformatics Oxford University Press 78.3 Good 75 100 67 564 Yes Yes 3 DOI 0
10 Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology Nature Portfolio 77.7 Good 85 100 33 616 No — 1 DOI 100
11 PEDIATRICS American Academy of Pediatrics 76.2 Good 72 100 67 514 No — 3 DOI 0
12 Nature reviews. Neuroscience Nature Portfolio 75.9 Good 82 100 33 568 No — 1 DOI 100
13 Annual Review of Biochemistry Annual Reviews 75.6 Good 70 100 67 539 No — 3 DOI 100
14 Nucleic Acids Research Oxford University Press 75.1 Good 78 75 67 873 Yes Yes 3 DOI 0
15 Nature reviews. Cancer Nature Portfolio 73.4 Good 78 100 33 593 No — 3 DOI 0
16 Nature Nature Portfolio 72.9 Good 77 100 33 1834 No — 3 DOI 100
17 Neurology Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 72.2 Good 68 100 58 522 No — 3 DOI 0
18 Angewandte Chemie International Edition Wiley 71.9 Good 70 100 50 723 No — 3 DOI 0
19 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Sciences 71.6 Good 66 100 58 1163 No — 3 DOI 0
20 Nature Reviews Genetics Nature Portfolio 70.5 Good 73 100 33 525 No — 1 DOI 100
21 ACS Nano American Chemical Society 70.1 Good 64 100 58 554 No — 3 DOI 0
22 JAMA American Medical Association 69.5 Adequate 77 75 42 994 No — 3 DOI 0
23 American Journal of Psychiatry American Psychiatric Association 67.5 Adequate 60 100 58 550 No — 3 DOI 0
24 Chemical Society Reviews Royal Society of Chemistry 67.0 Adequate 56 100 67 747 No — 3 DOI 100
25 Nature Communications Nature Portfolio 67.0 Adequate 67 100 33 729 Yes Yes 3 DOI 100
26 Science American Association for the Advancement of Science 66.0 Adequate 60 100 50 1740 No — 3 DOI 0
27 NeuroImage Elsevier BV 65.0 Adequate 53 100 67 528 Yes Yes 3 DOI 100
28 Archives of General Psychiatry American Medical Association 64.5 Adequate 82 75 0 544 No — 3 DOI 0
29 Journal of Neuroscience Society for Neuroscience 64.4 Adequate 52 100 67 651 No — 3 DOI 100
30 New England Journal of Medicine Massachusetts Medical Society 64.1 Adequate 68 75 42 1497 No — 3 DOI 0
31 Annals of Internal Medicine American College of Physicians 62.2 Adequate 59 75 58 649 No — 3 DOI 0
32 Nature reviews. Immunology Nature Portfolio 60.2 Adequate 56 100 33 562 No — 3 —
33 The Journal of Experimental Medicine Rockefeller University Press 59.2 Adequate 65 100 0 648 No — 3 DOI 0
34 The Journal of Cell Biology Rockefeller University Press 59.2 Adequate 65 100 0 597 No — 3 DOI 0
35 Cell Cell Press 58.7 Adequate 64 100 0 1220 No — 3 DOI 100
36 The Lancet Oncology Elsevier BV 58.4 Adequate 64 100 0 512 No — 3 DOI 100
37 Neuron Cell Press 58.0 Adequate 63 100 0 695 No — 2 DOI 100
38 Immunity Cell Press 57.6 Adequate 63 100 0 563 No — 3 DOI 100
39 Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres American Geophysical Union 57.3 Adequate 70 75 0 652 No — 3 DOI 0
40 Journal of Biological Chemistry Elsevier BV 57.2 Adequate 62 100 0 778 Yes Yes 2 DOI 100
41 Circulation Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 55.8 Adequate 60 100 0 841 No — 3 DOI 0
42 Psychological Review American Psychological Association 55.8 Adequate 38 100 67 515 No — 3 DOI 0
43 Journal of the American College of Cardiology Elsevier BV 55.7 Adequate 60 100 0 612 No — 3 DOI 100
44 Physiological Reviews American Physiological Society 54.9 Adequate 58 100 0 558 No — 3 DOI 0
45 Blood Elsevier BV 54.5 Adequate 57 100 0 636 No — 3 DOI 0
46 Journal of Clinical Oncology Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 53.6 Adequate 56 100 0 735 No — 3 DOI 0
47 Gastroenterology Elsevier BV 51.6 Adequate 53 100 0 583 No — 2 DOI 100
48 Journal of Clinical Investigation American Society for Clinical Investigation 49.8 Poor 38 100 33 708 Yes Yes 3 DOI 67
49 Genes & Development Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press 48.1 Poor 55 75 0 594 Yes No 3 DOI 0
50 Molecular Cell Elsevier BV 47.5 Poor 46 100 0 529 No — 3 DOI 100
Download & reproduce

Open data, open methodology, open critique

Every score is derived from direct HTML inspection of sample articles fetched as Googlebot. Disputes are resolved by re-running the specific check that contradicts the entry. The build script is in this repository; re-running it against the same DOI list produces the same scores (modulo publisher HTML edits).

Methodology Read the framework 17 checks, 3 weighted categories, dual-UA fetch chain documented XLSX Workbook 3 sheets: Ranking, Per-check detail, Methodology JSON Raw data Full per-check audit trail for the 50 journals, including every sample article inspected Blog Crawler-blocking analysis Why only a handful of these journals are simultaneously reachable AND declared open to AI bots