English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In this article, we propose a measure to assess scientific impact that discounts self‐citations and does not require any prior knowledge of their distribution among publications. This index can be applied to both researchers and journals. In particular, we show that it fills the gap of the h‐index and similar measures that do not take into account the effect of self‐citations for authors or journals impact evaluation. We provide 2 real‐world examples: First, we evaluate the research impact of the most productive scholars in computer science (according to  DBLP C omputer  S cience  B ibliography,  U niversität  T rier,  T rier,  G ermany); then we revisit the impact of the journals ranked in the  C omputer  S cience  A pplications section of the  SCI mago  J ournal &amp;  C ountry  R ank ranking service ( C onsejo  S uperior de  I nvestigaciones  C ientíficas,  U niversity of  G ranada,  E xtremadura,  M adrid,  S pain). We observe how self‐citations, in many cases, affect the rankings obtained according to different measures (including h‐index and ch‐index), and show how the proposed measure mitigates this effect.

Scientific impact evaluation and the effect of self‐citations: Mitigating the bias by discounting the h‐index