CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · Science & Nature

British Journal of Haematology

peer-reviewed scientific journal

Specimen drawers, botanical folios and brass scientific instruments under study light
Science and natureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionOct 26, 2025
Entity authorityQ4970200 ↗
Source-derived summary

The British Journal of Haematology is a peer-reviewed medical journal focusing on hematology and other blood-related topics, such as blood diseases and their treatment. It is published by [Wiley] on behalf of the British Society for Haematology.

Indexing

According to the Journal Citation Reports, the British Journal of Haematology had a 2016 impact factor of 5.67, ranking it 10th out of 70 in the category "Hematology".

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “British Journal of Haematology” is peer-reviewed scientific journal. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through British, Journal and Haematology, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA practical orientation to terminology and classification, particularly when read beside dated observations, specimens or technical literature. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2016—that can be checked directly. The linked authority record independently contributes the date 1955-01-01. For this dossier, British, Journal and Haematology is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “peer-reviewed scientific journal” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Oct 26, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q4970200. 3 of 3 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2016.

Critical limits

A general summary may omit uncertainty, sample limits or methodological disagreement that is explicit in the technical record. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.

Best used for
  • Current terminology
  • Classification context
  • Finding cited technical literature
Verify next

Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “British Journal of Haematology”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow British Journal of Haematology primary sources, British Journal of Haematology archive and British research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “British Journal of Haematology”?
  2. Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
  3. Is the terminology current, historical or disputed?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “British Journal of Haematology” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.