Does anyone have rate the relative quality of scientific papers, rather than authors? I've seen plenty of places where authors are rated on how much they publish and are cited. There are also metrics like the h-index and i10-index that try and assign a number to the relative quality of a given researcher (for better or worse). But, is there anything similar for individual articles?

It seems to me that people would want an easy way to see if a piece of research has been reproduced or not, peer reviewed for quality of methods and/or analysis, retracted, cited by other papers, the quality of the papers cited, etc. I would think that this would be an extremely useful tool to help people see if the paper they are reading, and potentially citing, is a quality paper or not. However, I've never seen or heard of anything that does this.

So, is there a service or metric out there that has something like an h-value on a per article basis rather than a per author basis?
Rating the quality of a paper is extremely difficult. Journal impact factors tell you little about the quality of individual papers. Citation counts are also misleading since papers that are wrong tend to get lots of citations. There is really no substitute for reading and making your own decisions.