Cell vs New England Journal of Medicine — Modern Reference
How fit each source is for citation in modern (LLM-era) writing — machine-readability, schema, freshness signals, AI-corpus presence.
New England Journal of Medicine outscores Cell on Modern Citation Reference by 6 points (B · 84 vs B · 78).
Cell
DOI per paper; Crossref metadata; abstracts open but full text Elsevier-paywalled.
New England Journal of Medicine
DOIs + structured abstracts + open-access policy for COVID + landmark trials.
Global rank · Modern Reference
Why these Modern Reference scores
DOI per paper; Crossref metadata; abstracts open but full text Elsevier-paywalled.
DOIs + structured abstracts + open-access policy for COVID + landmark trials.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
- Hybrid open accessSome papers open via author-paid OA; majority subscription-gated.
- Open landmark trialsSelected landmark trials available without paywall.
Other dimensions for Cell vs New England Journal of Medicine
Other Modern Reference 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/modern-reference.json