Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Dordrecht, GX, Netherlands · Member ID: 297 · 18,388,924 total works

Global Rank

#2,378

of 28,259

Percentile

Top 8%

of all publishers

View Full Leaderboard

Nearby in Rankings:

#2376Libyan Academy for Postgraduate Studies, Misrata Branch(40 pts)#2377CV Elkuator Research and Publication(40 pts)#2379Allerton Press(39 pts)#2380Journal of Graduate Medical Education(39 pts)

Nexus Score

39/ 100

+17 points vs historical

Score Breakdown by Era

Current

Last 2 years

#2,213

2,073,234 works

Backfile

Older than 2 years

#2,378

16,315,690 works

Ranked #2,213 for recent publications vs #2,378 overall — improving with recent work

Dimension Breakdown

Provenance

References, update policies, similarity check

19.8 / 25

People

ORCID coverage

4.6 / 20

Organizations

Affiliations and ROR IDs

0.2 / 15

Funding

Funder registry and award numbers

3.0 / 20

Access

Licenses, full-text links, abstracts

11.3 / 20

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
Posted ContentTOP	47	D	44%	60%	31%	1%	98%
Journal Articles	38	D	74%	18%	0%	14%	67%
Book Chapters	22	F	68%	4%	0%	0%	20%
Books	20	F	20%	5%	0%	0%	70%
Reference Books	20	F	20%	5%	0%	0%	69%
Datasets	14	F	15%	32%	0%	18%	0%
Monographs	12	F	13%	0%	0%	0%	44%
Journal Issues	5	F	1%	0%	0%	0%	23%
Edited Books	4	F	4%	0%	0%	0%	15%
Reference Entry	0	F	0%	0%	0%	0%	0%
Proceedings	0	F	0%	0%	0%	0%	0%
Journals	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.

Why doesn't the leaderboard use per-type scores? Deciding which content types count as "primary research" is subjective and varies by discipline and publisher model. The leaderboard uses Crossref's aggregate coverage to ensure a consistent, comparable baseline across all 27,000+ publishers. This per-type breakdown lets you see the full picture for any individual publisher.

Detailed Metrics

Metric	Coverage	Points	Status
References provenance	88%	13.2 / 15	Excellent
Update Policies provenance	86%	4.3 / 5	Excellent
Similarity Check provenance	99%	4.9 / 5	Excellent
ORCID Coverage people	36%	7.1 / 20	Needs Work
Affiliations (Text) organizations	7%	0.3 / 5	Poor
ROR IDs organizations	0%	0.0 / 10	Poor
Funder Registry funding	27%	2.7 / 10	Needs Work
Award Numbers funding	20%	2.0 / 10	Needs Work
Licenses access	97%	6.8 / 7	Excellent
Full-text Links access	67%	4.7 / 7	Good
Abstracts access	24%	1.4 / 6	Needs Work

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: 15% 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: 1% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve People

+11 pts potential

Include ORCID iDs for authors. Encourage authors to authenticate their ORCID during submission.

Current: 23% 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.

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Score Breakdown by Era

Dimension Breakdown

Score by Content Type

Detailed Metrics

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

Improve Funding

Improve Organizations

Improve People

Improvement Recommendations

Add ROR IDs for Affiliations

Include Author Affiliations

Include Abstracts

Increase ORCID Coverage

Add Funder Information

About This Score

Crossref Reports

Share Results