Cell vs New England Journal of Medicine — Discipline
How rigorously each source backs its factual claims with verifiable evidence.
Cell and New England Journal of Medicine tie on Citation Discipline (A+ · 96).
Cell
Rigorous peer review; high rejection rate; corrections + retractions public; methodology required.
New England Journal of Medicine
Rigorous peer-review; clinical-trial registration mandatory; data disclosure standards.
Global rank · Discipline
Why these Discipline scores
Rigorous peer review; high rejection rate; corrections + retractions public; methodology required.
Rigorous peer-review; clinical-trial registration mandatory; data disclosure standards.
Signals behind the Discipline score
- Peer-review rigorAmong the highest-rejection biology journals; multi-round review standard.
- ICMJE complianceStrict International Committee of Medical Journal Editors standards.
Other dimensions for Cell vs New England Journal of Medicine
Other Discipline comparisons
Sources & references
Every score on this page is read from the two publications below and graded against the published rubric. No score is bought, estimated or supplied by the source being scored.
- Source evaluated — Cell (cell.com) · verified · full scoring record
- Source evaluated — New England Journal of Medicine (nejm.org) · verified · full scoring record
- Scoring rubric — SourceScore Index, Citation Discipline, Modern Reference, Citation Velocity (methodology v0.1)
- Machine-readable record — /api/compare/cell-vs-nejm/discipline.json