What question did this study set out to answer?

To conduct a structured self-assessment of the Georgian Medical Journal using the LMU Journal Evaluation Tool and four additional frameworks.

May 14, 2026Open Access

Credibility Assessment of an Emerging Open-Access Medical Journal Using the LMU Journal Evaluation Tool: A Structured Self-Assessment of the Georgian Medical Journal with Comparison Across Five Evaluation Frameworks

Key Points

To conduct a structured self-assessment of the Georgian Medical Journal using the LMU Journal Evaluation Tool and four additional frameworks.
Applied the LMU Journal Evaluation Tool assessing 16 criteria scored 1–3.
Conducted parallel assessments using Think.Check.Submit., COPE–DOAJ–OASPA–WAME Principles, DOAJ criteria, and ICMJE recommendations.
Evaluated on 5 May 2026 using publicly visible evidence from gmj.ge.
GMJ scored 46/48 (95.8%) on the LMU rubric, indicating strong credibility.
Fifteen criteria achieved the maximum 3/3 score, with indexing confirmed in 11 databases.
One outstanding issue is the pending approval for DOAJ listing (scored 1/3).

Abstract

Background The growth of open-access (OA) publishing has intensified the need for transparent, reproducible journal quality assessment. Self-assessment using standardised tools is an emerging practice in responsible editorial governance. Objective To conduct a structured, publicly documented self-assessment of the Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ) in its inaugural year using the LMU Journal Evaluation Tool as the primary instrument, supplemented by parallel assessment against four additional international frameworks, and to establish an annual quality baseline. Methods The LMU Journal Evaluation Tool (Rele, Kennedy open access; LMU rubric; journal evaluation; Georgian Medical Journal; DOAJ; Think.Check.Submit.; COPE; predatory publishing; editorial transparency

Ask AI

Helpful

Bookmark

View Full Paper