Escuela de Postgrados de la FAC

Bogota, Colombia · Member ID: 7964 · 449 total works

Global Rank

#3,016

of 28,259

Percentile

Top 11%

of all publishers

To Reach Top 10%

points needed

View Full Leaderboard

Nearby in Rankings:

#3014The Korea Association of Clinical Ultrasound(36 pts)#3015FSBSI All-Russian Scientfic Research Institute of Vegetable Breeding and Seed Production(36 pts)#3017European Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (ECDC)(36 pts)#3018International Review of Economics and Management(36 pts)

Nexus Score

36/ 100

+3 points vs historical

Score Breakdown by Era

Current

Last 2 years

#4,631

27 works

Backfile

Older than 2 years

#3,016

422 works

Ranked #4,631 for recent publications vs #3,016 overall — recent work trailing historical performance

Dimension Breakdown

Provenance

References, update policies, similarity check

14.3 / 25

People

ORCID coverage

6.2 / 20

Organizations

Affiliations and ROR IDs

0.0 / 15

Funding

Funder registry and award numbers

0.1 / 20

Access

Licenses, full-text links, abstracts

15.0 / 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	41	D	76%	27%	0%	1%	82%
Monographs	6	F	0%	0%	0%	0%	30%
Book Chapters	6	F	0%	21%	0%	0%	7%
Edited Books	6	F	0%	0%	0%	0%	30%
Books	4	F	0%	16%	0%	0%	3%

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	37%	5.6 / 15	Needs Work
Update Policies provenance	74%	3.7 / 5	Good
Similarity Check provenance	74%	3.7 / 5	Good
ORCID Coverage people	37%	7.4 / 20	Needs Work
Affiliations (Text) organizations	0%	0.0 / 5	Poor
ROR IDs organizations	0%	0.0 / 10	Poor
Funder Registry funding	0%	0.0 / 10	Poor
Award Numbers funding	0%	0.0 / 10	Poor
Licenses access	74%	5.2 / 7	Good
Full-text Links access	74%	5.2 / 7	Good
Abstracts access	100%	6.0 / 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

+16 pts potential

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

Current: 1% 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 People

+10 pts potential

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

Current: 31% 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.

Escuela de Postgrados de la FAC

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

Deposit Complete References

Add ROR IDs for Affiliations

Add Funder Information

Include Award/Grant Numbers

Include Author Affiliations

About This Score

Crossref Reports

Share Results