Predicting Scopus Journal Discontinuation (2022–25): Quantifiable Editorial and Bibliometric Signals

Large citation databases such as Scopus play a central role in governing scholarly visibility and research credibility. In recent years, journal discontinuations from Scopus have increased markedly, yet empirical evidence on the measurable signals that precede delisting remains limited. Existing documentation outlines re-evaluation categories but provides little insight into how editorial, behavioural and bibliometric indicators converge in practice. To identify quantifiable editorial and bibliometric signals that precede Scopus journal discontinuation and examine how these signals align with Scopus’s four re-evaluation categories—metrics, publication concerns, outlier behaviour, and continuous curation—the authors conducted a retrospective analysis of journals discontinued from Scopus between January 2022 and August 2025. Using Scopus discontinuation reports and source-level metadata, the authors examined quartile position, instability in publication and indexing volumes, shifts in author-affiliation geography, and deviations from stated journal scope. Network correlation analysis was used to explore the co-occurrence of re-evaluation indicators. A total of 132 discontinued journals were identified. Most were ranked in lower quartiles (Q3–Q4), yet discontinuation was not confined to low-impact titles. Over 70 percent of journals exhibited abrupt changes in publication volume, nearly half showed indexing irregularities, and one-third demonstrated substantial shifts in author-affiliation geography. Publication concerns and Radar-detected anomalies emerged as the most common discontinuation drivers, frequently co-occurring with publication-volume instability. These patterns indicate that delisting decisions are typically preceded by clusters of behavioural and editorial risk signals rather than isolated metric underperformance. Scopus journal discontinuation reflects a form of risk-based editorial governance grounded in the accumulation of structural and behavioural warning signals rather than citation performance alone. Monitoring publication instability, authorship shifts, indexing inconsistencies, and scope drift may provide actionable early-warning indicators for editors, publishers, and researchers. Framing discontinuation as a continuum-based quality-assurance process highlights the need for greater transparency, proportional remediation pathways, and development-oriented oversight within global indexing systems.