European Heart Journal SJR and Scopus Metrics: What They Actually Mean
European Heart Journal still has flagship cardiology metrics, but the real submission question is whether your paper is broad enough for that readership.
Next step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the guide or checklist that matches this page's intent before you ask for a manuscript-level diagnostic.
European Heart Journal at a glance
Key metrics to place the journal before deciding whether it fits your manuscript and career goals.
What makes this journal worth targeting
- IF 35.6 puts European Heart Journal in a visible tier — citations from papers here carry real weight.
- Scope specificity matters more than impact factor for most manuscript decisions.
- Acceptance rate of ~~10% means fit determines most outcomes.
When to look elsewhere
- When your paper sits at the edge of the journal's stated scope — borderline fit rarely improves after submission.
- If timeline matters: European Heart Journal takes ~~20 days. A faster-turnaround journal may suit a grant or job deadline better.
- If open access is required by your funder, verify the journal's OA agreements before submitting.
Quick answer: European Heart Journal still has flagship-level Scopus authority in cardiology. Current Scopus-based sources place it at SJR 4.987, impact score 7.46, global rank 295, and h-index 367 in 2024. That confirms top-tier field influence. The hard submission question is not whether the journal is strong. It is whether the manuscript has broad enough cardiovascular consequence for a field-wide readership rather than a narrower subspecialty audience.
Direct answer
If your question is whether European Heart Journal still behaves like a true cardiology flagship in the Scopus system, the answer is yes.
Metric | Current value | What it tells you |
|---|---|---|
SJR | 4.987 | prestige-weighted influence remains elite for cardiology |
Impact Score | 7.46 | citation density is still strong and durable |
Global rank | 295 | the journal remains near the top of the full global ranking |
h-index | 367 | the archive has deep long-run field influence |
Best quartile | Q1 | the title remains firmly top-tier |
Coverage history | 1980-2025 | this is durable flagship authority, not a short-lived peak |
That profile matters because EHJ is not only a society brand. It remains one of the main journals cardiologists use to benchmark broad field consequence.
Overview
The useful summary is that European Heart Journal is still in the flagship cardiology lane, but the current 2024 profile looks stronger than the softer 2022-2023 stretch. The SJR is up from 4.091 in 2023, and the impact score is up from 6.58. That tells you the title is recovering strength within the same high-end band rather than drifting out of it.
What changed in 2024
The 2024 picture is meaningfully better than the prior two years.
- SJR moved up from 4.091 in 2023 to 4.987 in 2024
- impact score moved up from 6.58 to 7.46
- global rank improved from 396 to 295
That matters because it confirms the journal's field authority remains intact. For authors, the implication is that the flagship screen is still real.
Ten-year SJR and Scopus trend
Year | SJR | Impact Score | Global Rank |
|---|---|---|---|
2024 | 4.987 | 7.46 | 295 |
2023 | 4.091 | 6.58 | 396 |
2022 | 3.450 | 6.48 | 481 |
2021 | 4.118 | 6.52 | 368 |
2020 | 4.336 | 5.45 | 351 |
2019 | 5.883 | 5.49 | 214 |
2018 | 6.788 | 7.08 | 169 |
2017 | 9.315 | 8.06 | 89 |
2016 | 7.285 | 8.04 | 151 |
2015 | 7.264 | 7.75 | 144 |
2014 | 6.807 | 9.01 | 168 |
The trend shows a journal that remains in the flagship cardiology band even though its prestige weighting is lower than its 2017 peak. The 2024 rebound matters because it ends the impression that EHJ is still drifting downward.
What the trend means in practice
For authors, the trend usually means:
- EHJ still expects papers with broad cardiovascular reach
- the journal remains strong enough that narrow papers look narrow quickly
- the readership is broad across cardiology, not only one disease or technique lane
- a very good specialist paper is not automatically an EHJ paper
That is why the journal can reject excellent cardiovascular work that still lacks field-wide consequence.
How European Heart Journal compares with realistic neighbors
Journal | Relative 2024 profile | What the metric profile usually signals |
|---|---|---|
European Heart Journal | SJR 4.987 | flagship cardiology journal with very broad readership |
Circulation | higher prestige weighting than EHJ | similarly broad field-wide decision lane |
JACC | same flagship cardiology lane | top-field option for high-consequence cardiovascular work |
specialty cardiology journals | materially lower prestige concentration | better fit when the audience is narrower or more technical |
This is the useful comparison. EHJ still sits in the rare top-cardiology room even if the exact metric shape differs from Circulation or JACC.
What editors are really screening for
The official journal description is direct:
- the highest quality material
- both clinical and scientific work
- all aspects of cardiovascular medicine
- research broad enough to matter to the field
That is why the profile remains strong. EHJ is not merely rewarding topic heat. It is still rewarding wide cardiovascular relevance.
In Our Pre-Submission Review Work on European Heart Journal Metric Questions
In our pre-submission review work on European Heart Journal metric questions, three mistakes recur.
The subspecialty prestige mistake. Authors often treat EHJ as the obvious destination for any strong cardiology paper even when the audience is actually much narrower.
The practice-consequence mistake. Another common miss is a technically clean study with insufficient implication for broader cardiovascular practice or field understanding.
The society-halo mistake. We also see teams lean on the ESC connection and the journal's reputation to substitute for honest fit analysis. The SJR confirms authority. It does not rescue a paper that belongs in a more specialized cardiovascular venue.
That is the practical value of the metrics. They explain why EHJ can preserve a broad, demanding audience standard.
What these metrics mean for authors
For authors, the current profile says:
- publication here still carries major field-wide cardiology signal
- the archive is strong enough that weak audience fit becomes obvious quickly
- the journal rewards breadth of cardiovascular consequence more than local excellence
- if the manuscript truly fits, the visibility upside remains substantial
The h-index of 367 matters because it reflects a deep archive of widely reused cardiovascular papers rather than a narrow specialty footprint.
Submit If / Think Twice If
Submit if:
- the manuscript matters across the broader cardiovascular field
- the study has obvious clinical or scientific consequence beyond one slice of cardiology
- the work would attract attention outside one narrow technical lane
- the paper still looks important after you strip away prestige language
Think twice if:
- the paper is strong but mainly relevant to one subspecialty audience
- the practical or field-wide consequence still feels indirect
- the manuscript is more technical than broad in appeal
- a more specialized cardiology journal is the honest fit
Readiness check
Run the scan while the topic is in front of you.
See score, top issues, and journal-fit signals before you submit.
What should drive the decision after the metrics check
The better question is whether the manuscript is truly an European Heart Journal paper in its current form.
That is why the next useful reads are:
- European Heart Journal impact factor
- European Heart Journal submission guide
- European Heart Journal submission process
- European Heart Journal journal profile
If the study has broad cardiovascular consequence, the upside is real. If it is still too narrow, the metrics are mostly a warning against over-targeting. A European Heart Journal submission framing check is the fastest way to pressure-test that before submission.
Practical verdict
European Heart Journal still has a genuine flagship Scopus profile for cardiology, and the 2024 rebound confirms that it remains solidly in that tier.
For authors, the metric question is already settled. The live question is whether the manuscript is broad enough for the readership the journal actually serves.
- European Heart Journal impact factor, Manusights.
Frequently asked questions
European Heart Journal's 2024 SJR is 4.987 on current Scopus-based metric aggregators, which keeps it firmly in Q1 and in the flagship cardiology tier.
Current Scopus-based sources place European Heart Journal's 2024 impact score at 7.46, with a global rank of 295 and h-index of 367.
Because it remains one of the central journals in cardiovascular medicine, with broad clinical visibility across the European and global cardiology community.
No. The real question is whether the manuscript has broad enough cardiovascular consequence for a flagship ESC-linked audience.
Sources
- 1. European Heart Journal metrics page, Resurchify.
- 2. About the Journal | European Heart Journal, Oxford Academic.
- 3. European Heart Journal impact page, Oxford Academic.
Before you upload
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Move from this article into the next decision-support step. The scan works best once the journal and submission plan are clearer.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.
Anthropic Privacy Partner. Zero-retention manuscript processing.
Where to go next
Start here
Same journal, next question
- EHJ Submit Guide: European Heart Journal Requirements
- How to Avoid Desk Rejection at European Heart Journal (2026)
- Is European Heart Journal a Good Journal? The ESC Flagship, Decoded
- European Heart Journal Impact Factor 2026: 35.6, Q1, Rank 3/230
- European Heart Journal APC and Open Access: OUP Pricing, ESC Discounts, and Your Options
- EHJ Submit: European Heart Journal Submission Process From Upload to First Decision
Supporting reads
Conversion step
Choose the next useful decision step first.
Use the scan once the manuscript and target journal are concrete enough to evaluate.