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 00:22 UTC — 21 Oct 2026 00:49 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 1 | 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): 2026-10-21T00:22:02.280298+00:00 — 2026-10-21T00:49:33.605728+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 | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 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 |
|---|---|
| 2019 | 1 |
| 2020 | 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 Finance & Banking Studies SSBFNET | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1.0 | 1 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1.0 | 1 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
Investors in Taiwan prefer to invest in offshore funds, and they are good customers in the eyes of the world's major fund companies. Funds are competing these investors through these 3,400 bank branches. Literature has indicated comprehensive selection criteria when investors choosing a fund, yet no study revealed the gap between what investors’ expected and experienced. The current study conducted a survey among these investors with importance-performance analysis (IPA) to fill this gap. There were two parts in the questionnaire, first part was drawn from literature to measure funds, and the second part was summarized from several depth interviews based on SERVQUAL with senior investors. 240 valid responses from current fund investors. The factors investor’s preference in evaluating a fund may be different in terms of residence areas and age. Perceived importance of fund selection criteria is not significantly different in terms of gender, education, marriage, and income levels. Test results indicated that “investment performance record”, “management fees” and “additional features” of fund, and the “sympathy” dimension of bank should be first improved by either fund or bank company respectively.
Diabetic Mellitus (DM) is a widespread chronic disease around the world, among which type 2 DM (T2DM) shared the majority. It caused multiple severe complications and consequently a high mortality rate. DM complications overwhelm jeopardize the patient’s quality of life. In response to the threats of such complications, some nutraceuticals were developed, including the highly praised bitter melon peptide (BMP). This study aims to apply the structural equation model in HBM. A theoretical model had been developed on the health belief model (HBM), and to test with the structural equation model (SEM) technique to examine the fitness of the theory and the data gathered in this research. A structural questionnaire was developed and used to collect 292 valid responses from DM patients. The SEM results indicated the fitness of the theory and the data were acceptable. Perceived susceptibility of DM complications and perceived benefits of nutraceutical were major predictors of intake behavior, and the association of perceived benefits and behavior was mediated by the patient’s self-efficacy on nutraceutical intake behavior.
Diabetic Mellitus (DM) is a widespread chronic disease around the world, among which type 2 DM (T2DM) shared the majority. It caused multiple severe complications and consequently a high mortality rate. DM complications overwhelm jeopardize the patient’s quality of life. In response to the threats of such complications, some nutraceuticals were developed, including the highly praised bitter melon peptide (BMP). This study aims to apply the structural equation model in HBM. A theoretical model had been developed on the health belief model (HBM), and to test with the structural equation model (SEM) technique to examine the fitness of the theory and the data gathered in this research. A structural questionnaire was developed and used to collect 292 valid responses from DM patients. The SEM results indicated the fitness of the theory and the data were acceptable. Perceived susceptibility of DM complications and perceived benefits of nutraceutical were major predictors of intake behavior, and the association of perceived benefits and behavior was mediated by the patient’s self-efficacy on nutraceutical intake behavior.
Investors in Taiwan prefer to invest in offshore funds, and they are good customers in the eyes of the world's major fund companies. Funds are competing these investors through these 3,400 bank branches. Literature has indicated comprehensive selection criteria when investors choosing a fund, yet no study revealed the gap between what investors’ expected and experienced. The current study conducted a survey among these investors with importance-performance analysis (IPA) to fill this gap. There were two parts in the questionnaire, first part was drawn from literature to measure funds, and the second part was summarized from several depth interviews based on SERVQUAL with senior investors. 240 valid responses from current fund investors. The factors investor’s preference in evaluating a fund may be different in terms of residence areas and age. Perceived importance of fund selection criteria is not significantly different in terms of gender, education, marriage, and income levels. Test results indicated that “investment performance record”, “management fees” and “additional features” of fund, and the “sympathy” dimension of bank should be first improved by either fund or bank company respectively.
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 19:56 UTC · ijfbs | complete · ijfbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |