FapUNIFESP (SciELO)

Sao Paolo, Brazil · Member ID: 530 · 513,499 total works

Global Rank

#1,732

of 28,259

Percentile

Top 6%

of all publishers

View Full Leaderboard

Nearby in Rankings:

#1730Wiley(43 pts)#1731ASTM International(43 pts)#1733The Korean Powder Metallurgy & Materials Institute(43 pts)#1734Brieflands(43 pts)

Nexus Score

43/ 100

+27 points vs historical

Score Breakdown by Era

Current

Last 2 years

#743

43,332 works

Backfile

Older than 2 years

#1,732

470,167 works

Ranked #743 for recent publications vs #1,732 overall — improving with recent work

Dimension Breakdown

Provenance

References, update policies, similarity check

17.2 / 25

People

ORCID coverage

11.6 / 20

Organizations

Affiliations and ROR IDs

4.1 / 15

Funding

Funder registry and award numbers

1.3 / 20

Access

Licenses, full-text links, abstracts

8.5 / 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	33	F	67%	28%	27%	1%	30%
Posted Content	33	F	0%	99%	0%	0%	65%
Edited Books	12	F	22%	0%	0%	0%	33%
Monographs	11	F	34%	0%	0%	0%	14%
Book Chapters	11	F	42%	0%	0%	0%	2%
Books	10	F	24%	0%	0%	0%	20%
Reference Books	3	F	13%	0%	0%	0%	0%
Journal Issues	1	F	3%	0%	0%	0%	1%

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	91%	13.6 / 15	Excellent
Update Policies provenance	0%	0.0 / 5	Poor
Similarity Check provenance	94%	4.7 / 5	Excellent
ORCID Coverage people	95%	19.0 / 20	Excellent
Affiliations (Text) organizations	90%	4.5 / 5	Excellent
ROR IDs organizations	0%	0.0 / 10	Poor
Funder Registry funding	14%	1.4 / 10	Poor
Award Numbers funding	12%	1.2 / 10	Poor
Licenses access	98%	6.8 / 7	Excellent
Full-text Links access	0%	0.0 / 7	Poor
Abstracts access	80%	4.8 / 6	Excellent

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

+15 pts potential

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

Current: 6% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve Organizations

+8 pts potential

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

Current: 28% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve Access

+8 pts potential

Add abstracts, license URLs (using SPDX identifiers), and full-text links to your metadata.

Current: 42% 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.

FapUNIFESP (SciELO)

Score Breakdown by Era

Dimension Breakdown

Score by Content Type

Detailed Metrics

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

Improve Funding

Improve Organizations

Improve Access

Improvement Recommendations

Add ROR IDs for Affiliations

Add Full-Text URLs

Add Funder Information

Enable Crossmark

Include Award/Grant Numbers

About This Score

Crossref Reports

Share Results