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

Recently, two new indicators (Equalized Mean-based Normalized ProportionCited, EMNPC; Mean-based Normalized Proportion Cited, MNPC) were proposed whichare intended for sparse scientometrics data. The indicators compare theproportion of mentioned papers (e.g. on Facebook) of a unit (e.g., a researcheror institution) with the proportion of mentioned papers in the correspondingfields and publication years (the expected values). In this study, we propose athird indicator (Mantel-Haenszel quotient, MHq) belonging to the same indicatorfamily. The MHq is based on the MH analysis - an established method instatistics for the comparison of proportions. We test (using citations andassessments by peers, i.e. F1000Prime recommendations) if the three indicatorscan distinguish between different quality levels as defined on the basis of theassessments by peers. Thus, we test their convergent validity. We find that theindicator MHq is able to distinguish between the quality levels in most caseswhile MNPC and EMNPC are not. Since the MHq is shown in this study to be avalid indicator, we apply it to six types of zero-inflated altmetrics data andtest whether different altmetrics sources are related to quality. The resultsfor the various altmetrics demonstrate that the relationship between altmetrics(Wikipedia, Facebook, blogs, and news data) and assessments by peers is not asstrong as the relationship between citations and assessments by peers.Actually, the relationship between citations and peer assessments is about twoto three times stronger than the association between altmetrics and assessmentsby peers.

Normalization of zero-inflated data: An empirical analysis of a new indicator family and its use with altmetrics data