Journal Risk Radar
Research and Practice in Anesthesiology – Open Journal
ISSN 2474-8919 · Openventio Publishers · US · openventio.org
Journal Trust Rating D · 52/100 · scored 28 Sep 2026 · 6 of 13 signals measured
15
Low
LowGuardedElevatedHigh
The fifteen signals
Points as the rules gave them today. "n/a" means the source did not give enough to judge — it never counts against the journal.
+0
Publication volume surge of 152025: 0 articles against a prior three-year average of 4 per year (×0.0) · source ↗Rule: ≥3× the prior three-year average (and ≥100 articles) in the last complete year: 15 · ≥2× (and ≥60): 8
+10
Output has stopped of 10last article in 2023; nothing in 2024 or 2025 · source ↗Rule: no articles in the last two complete years although the journal has published before: 10
n/a
Citations mostly from itself of 15only 8 citing articles — too few to judge · source ↗Rule: share of citations to its most-cited recent articles that come from the journal itself — ≥40%: 15 · ≥25%: 8 (needs ≥20 citations)
n/a
Citations concentrated in one other journal of 10only 8 citing articles — too few to judge · source ↗Rule: one other journal supplies ≥40% of those citations (≥30): 10 · ≥25% (≥20): 5
n/a
Authorship shifted to a new country of 10fewer than 30 author-country links in a period — not judged · source ↗Rule: the top author country of the last two years holds ≥50% and rose ≥30 points against the three years before: 10
+0
Retracted articles of 15no retraction on record in OpenAlex or Crossref · source ↗Rule: ≥3 retractions and ≥1% of all articles: 15 · ≥3: 8 · 1–2: 3 (Retraction Watch via OpenAlex; Crossref retraction notices)
n/a
AI-writing signals in recent abstracts of 12only 0 recent English abstracts with 40+ words — too few to judge (20 needed) · source ↗Rule: of the abstracts published since last year (20 or more read): ≥40% read as assistant-written by the excess-vocabulary rule, or any abstract carries an assistant fingerprint sentence: 12 · ≥25%: 6
n/a
Tortured phrases in recent abstracts of 10no recent abstracts to read · source ↗Rule: recent abstracts carrying a paper-mill tortured phrase — 3 or more abstracts: 10 · 1–2: 4
n/a
Scope spread thin across fields of 8fewer than 50 recent articles — not judged · source ↗Rule: recent articles spread over ≥6 top-level fields each holding ≥8% (with ≥50 articles): 8 · 4–5 fields: 3
+5
n/a
No digital preservation on record of 8ISSN Portal and DOAJ not readable · source ↗Rule: no archive in the Keepers Registry (ISSN Portal) and none declared to DOAJ: 8
n/a
Articles deposited without reference lists or abstracts of 8not a Crossref journal (no DOIs registered under this ISSN) · source ↗Rule: Crossref coverage for current articles — references <20%: 5 · abstracts <20%: 3 (needs ≥20 DOIs)
n/a
Title or website differ from the ISSN record of 12ISSN Portal record not readable · source ↗Rule: ISSN Portal key-title differs from the indexed title: 6 · the website on the ISSN record is a different host from the one OpenAlex indexes: 6
+0
Title shared with another journal of 6no other journal with this exact title in OpenAlex · source ↗Rule: another OpenAlex source carries the same title under a different ISSN: 6
+0
On a hijacked- or removed-journal list of 40not on the hijacked-journal checker · source ↗Rule: Retraction Watch hijacked-journal checker (a clone of this journal exists): 25 · an admin-imported removed-journal list: 40
What Low means
The public record shows none of the patterns that precede delisting or hijacking, or only faint ones. Still read the Journal Trust Rating: a journal can be safe and untidy at the same time.
Watch this journal
One mail the week its band rises or its score climbs 15 points — nothing otherwise. Re-scored weekly.
Sign in to watchTake it with you
JSON for your own system, an SVG badge for a page, a re-check when the record changed.
https://scholar.smartscholars.in/radar.php?issn=2474-8919&format=json
Are you the editor?
Every signal names its source and its threshold. Fix the structural ones (preservation, DOAJ, reference deposits, the ISSN record) with the journal tools; the behavioural ones fall as the record changes. If a source is wrong about you, correct it at the source — the score follows.
