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/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Accurate measurement of research productivity should take account of both thenumber of co-authors of every scientific work and of the differentcontributions of the individuals. For researchers in the life sciences, commonpractice is to indicate such contributions through position in the authorslist. In this work, we measure the distortion introduced to bibliometricranking lists for scientific productivity when the number of co-authors ortheir position in the list is ignored. The field of observation consists of allItalian university professors working in the life sciences, with scientificproduction examined over the period 2004-2008. The outcomes of the study leadto a recommendation against using indicators or evaluation methods that ignorethe different authors' contributions to the research results.

journal of informetrics

The importance of accounting for the number of co-authors and their  order when assessing research performance at the individual level in the life  sciences