Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 2 / 2 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC — 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
2 / 2 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 2 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 39 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | All selected publications | 45 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 2 / 2 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-21T00:14:29.371983+00:00 — 2026-10-21T07:22:45.993492+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 5 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 11 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 19 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 10 | 2 | 2/2 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2022 | 1 |
| 2024 | 1 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1/1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 1 | 39 | 45 | 1/1 | 39.0 | 39 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
The Covid-19 pandemic, a catalyst in embracing the online mode of learning, is one of the key motivating factors for a paradigm shift in curriculum development due to the increased focus and reliance on technology. For the effective education of tertiary students globally, a revised curriculum development integrated with the Learning Management Systems and other eLearning platforms or tools that support asynchronous learning play a key role. This study seeks to determine the influence of user experience and user interface design of e-learning platforms on learning experience in higher education. A systematic review of studies regarding usability of e-learning platforms at tertiary institutions was conducted to determine the common issues and successes. A snapshot of research over the last five years was used in a systematic review to determine the influence of UX/UI on eLearning concerning higher education. Using the ERIC and Google scholar databases of journals, and specific criteria for selection of publications, 25 articles were examined in this study. Findings indicate that focused attention on interface design and user experience of eLearning systems for effective learning is crucial.
Population growth and changes in consumer demographics over time require fast moving consumer goods or FMCG company that produce consumer goods to keep innovating. Food market was forecasted to continuously increase between 2024 and 2029 by in total 85.1 million U.S Dollars while beauty and personal care segment projected to reach 10.89 billion U.S Dollars revenue by 2028. Product innovations that are carried out have to conform to regulatory provisions while also meet the required efficacy, quality and safety of the product. The process of fulfilling product compliance can be improved by utilizing technology through digital application. Creation of a digital application have to consider the usability aspect of the user. Design thinking is a method that has been widely used to create a product with human-centered approach and prioritizing the user aspect. Digital application created using a design thinking approach will be easy to use and improve the product compliance process so that companies can have competitive edge compared to competitors. This research is qualitative research that uses study case with design thinking approach. The data was collected by interview method and supplemented by observation method. Informant was five employees that involved in fulfillment of product compliance. Design thinking in this research includes 5 phases, namely empathize, define, ideation, prototype, test. These phases help map problems and formulate ideas to be made into functions or features. Based on the results of the analysis and exploration of ideas, a medium fidelity prototype application was produced which has 4 main menus integrated with 1 technical documentation system. The resulting prototype was tested using the system usability scale and obtained a score of 73.9 and usability rating of 26.6 out of 40 with both grade B-. Further research is expected in refining the prototype and further evaluation on the impact toward product compliance’s business process.
Population growth and changes in consumer demographics over time require fast moving consumer goods or FMCG company that produce consumer goods to keep innovating. Food market was forecasted to continuously increase between 2024 and 2029 by in total 85.1 million U.S Dollars while beauty and personal care segment projected to reach 10.89 billion U.S Dollars revenue by 2028. Product innovations that are carried out have to conform to regulatory provisions while also meet the required efficacy, quality and safety of the product. The process of fulfilling product compliance can be improved by utilizing technology through digital application. Creation of a digital application have to consider the usability aspect of the user. Design thinking is a method that has been widely used to create a product with human-centered approach and prioritizing the user aspect. Digital application created using a design thinking approach will be easy to use and improve the product compliance process so that companies can have competitive edge compared to competitors. This research is qualitative research that uses study case with design thinking approach. The data was collected by interview method and supplemented by observation method. Informant was five employees that involved in fulfillment of product compliance. Design thinking in this research includes 5 phases, namely empathize, define, ideation, prototype, test. These phases help map problems and formulate ideas to be made into functions or features. Based on the results of the analysis and exploration of ideas, a medium fidelity prototype application was produced which has 4 main menus integrated with 1 technical documentation system. The resulting prototype was tested using the system usability scale and obtained a score of 73.9 and usability rating of 26.6 out of 40 with both grade B-. Further research is expected in refining the prototype and further evaluation on the impact toward product compliance’s business process.
The Covid-19 pandemic, a catalyst in embracing the online mode of learning, is one of the key motivating factors for a paradigm shift in curriculum development due to the increased focus and reliance on technology. For the effective education of tertiary students globally, a revised curriculum development integrated with the Learning Management Systems and other eLearning platforms or tools that support asynchronous learning play a key role. This study seeks to determine the influence of user experience and user interface design of e-learning platforms on learning experience in higher education. A systematic review of studies regarding usability of e-learning platforms at tertiary institutions was conducted to determine the common issues and successes. A snapshot of research over the last five years was used in a systematic review to determine the influence of UX/UI on eLearning concerning higher education. Using the ERIC and Google scholar databases of journals, and specific criteria for selection of publications, 25 articles were examined in this study. Findings indicate that focused attention on interface design and user experience of eLearning systems for effective learning is crucial.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |