eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd

Cambridge, United Kingdom · Member ID: 4374 · 107,967 total works

Global Rank

#2,385

of 28,259

Percentile

Top 8%

of all publishers

View Full Leaderboard

Nearby in Rankings:

#2383Centre for Evaluation in Education and Science (CEON/CEES)(39 pts)#2384Physical Society of Japan(39 pts)#2386Computational Structural Engineering Institute of Korea(39 pts)#2387Yonetim ve Ekonomi Arastirmalari Dergisi - Journal of Management and Economics Research(39 pts)

Nexus Score

38/ 100

-15 points vs historical

Score Breakdown by Era

Current

Last 2 years

#6,076

52,002 works

Backfile

Older than 2 years

#2,385

55,965 works

Ranked #6,076 for recent publications vs #2,385 overall — recent work trailing historical performance

Dimension Breakdown

Provenance

References, update policies, similarity check

6.3 / 25

People

ORCID coverage

11.5 / 20

Organizations

Affiliations and ROR IDs

6.5 / 15

Funding

Funder registry and award numbers

3.7 / 20

Access

Licenses, full-text links, abstracts

10.3 / 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
Journal ArticlesTOP	88	A	92%	92%	62%	87%	99%
Posted Content	63	C	74%	89%	68%	12%	72%
Peer Reviews	21	F	0%	45%	35%	0%	35%
Components	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	26%	4.0 / 15	Needs Work
Update Policies provenance	12%	0.6 / 5	Poor
Similarity Check provenance	21%	1.1 / 5	Needs Work
ORCID Coverage people	35%	7.1 / 20	Needs Work
Affiliations (Text) organizations	59%	3.0 / 5	Good
ROR IDs organizations	30%	3.0 / 10	Needs Work
Funder Registry funding	11%	1.1 / 10	Poor
Award Numbers funding	13%	1.4 / 10	Poor
Licenses access	100%	7.0 / 7	Excellent
Full-text Links access	15%	1.1 / 7	Poor
Abstracts access	27%	1.6 / 6	Needs Work

Your journal articles score 88 (Grade A) — strong work on your primary research outputs! The tips below reflect your aggregate coverage across all content types, where there's still room to grow.

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

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

Improve Provenance

+14 pts potential

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

Current: 25% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve Funding

+12 pts potential

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

Current: 19% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve Organizations

+6 pts potential

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

Current: 43% 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.

eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd

Score Breakdown by Era

Dimension Breakdown

Score by Content Type

Detailed Metrics

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

Improve Provenance

Improve Funding

Improve Organizations

Improvement Recommendations

Deposit Complete References

Add Funder Information

Add Full-Text URLs

Include Abstracts

Increase ORCID Coverage

About This Score

Crossref Reports

Share Results