Current Vascular Pharmacology

Our screening flags Current Vascular Pharmacology as a possible predatory venue because its publisher appears on Beall's archive, which has been frozen since 2017. Treat this as a prompt to check carefully, not a verdict: verify against DOAJ and Think. Check. Submit before submitting.

Per our venue index, Current Vascular Pharmacology appears in: Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed. Index membership changes over time — confirm on the index's own site before relying on it.

Papers in Current Vascular Pharmacology are cited about 2.3 times each within two years of publication, and Scimago places it in Q2, with an h-index of 80. Those are the open equivalents: the Clarivate Journal Impact Factor is a proprietary metric we neither compute nor license, so we show the two-year citation rate and Scimago quartile instead — they answer the same question of how heavily the journal is cited. A citation rate is a property of a field as much as of a journal.

In the Scimago Journal Rank 2025 edition, Current Vascular Pharmacology is Q2 in 1 of its 2 subject categories and Q3 in the other 1. By category: Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine: Q2, #187 of 414; Pharmacology: Q3, #177 of 339. Its best category quartile is Q2. Quartiles split the journals in a subject category into four equal groups by SJR, so Q1 is the most-cited quarter and Q4 the least; Current Vascular Pharmacology is cited about 2.3 times per paper over two years, with an h-index of 80.

The Web of Science quartile comes from Clarivate's Journal Citation Reports (JCR), a proprietary product we neither license nor compute — so we cannot state a JCR quartile for Current Vascular Pharmacology. The open equivalent is its best Scimago quartile, Q2 in Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, derived from Scopus citation data. Because JCR ranks against Web of Science and Scimago against Scopus, the two can differ, so check Clarivate's site directly if you need the JCR quartile specifically.

Our index records its access status as "subscription". Where this is derived from publisher-level signals rather than works-level data it is a heuristic, so confirm on the journal's own site — particularly if an article processing charge matters to you.