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

The article "Caveats for the journal and field normalizations in the CWTS(`Leiden') evaluations of research performance", published by Tobias Opthof andLoet Leydesdorff (arXiv:1002.2769) deals with a subject as important as theapplication of so called field normalized indicators of citation impact in theassessment of research performance of individual researchers and researchgroups. Field normalization aims to account for differences in citationpractices across scientific-scholarly subject fields. As the primary author ofthe papers presenting the "Leiden" indicators and of many reports and articlesreporting on the outcomes of assessments actually using these measures, Icomment on the 3 main issues addressed in the paper by Opthof and Leydesdorff.

CWTS crown indicator measures citation impact of a research group's publication oeuvre