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: 6 / 6 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: 22 Oct 2026 01:31 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 05:05 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.
6 / 6 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 6 selected publications.
6 / 6 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 6 selected publications.
6 / 6 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 6 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2014 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | All selected publications | 26 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2014 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 8 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 8 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | All selected publications | 65 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2014 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2015 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2016 | All selected publications | 54 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2017 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 12 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2025 | 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 6 / 6 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): 2026-10-22T01:31:40.455678+00:00 — 2026-10-22T05:05:27.114437+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 | 11 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 24 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 14 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 13 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 8 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 12 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 10 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 16 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 3 | 6 | 6/6 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 6 | 6 | 6/6 |
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 ↗
Records with full publication dates only. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2013-04 | 1 |
| 2013-10 | 1 |
| 2016-01 | 1 |
| 2016-03 | 1 |
| 2020-12 | 1 |
| 2025-03 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bussecon Review of Social Sciences Bussecon International Academy | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1.0 | 1 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 1 | 8 | 12 | 1/1 | 8.0 | 8 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Finance & Banking Studies SSBFNET | 2 | 24 | 72 | 2/2 | 12.0 | 12.0 | 100.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 2 | 10 | 47 | 2/2 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 100.0 | 2/2 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
Location selection problem in banking is an important issue for the commercial success in competitive environment. There is a strategic fit between the location selection decision and overall performance of a new branch. Providing physical service in requested location as well as alternative distribution channels to meet profitable client needs is the current problematic to achieve the competitive advantage over the rivalry in financial system. In this paper, an integrated model has been developed to support in the decision of branch location selection for a new bank branch. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique has been conductedto prioritize of evaluation criteria, and multi-objective optimization on the basis of ratio analysis (MOORA) method has been applied to rank location alternatives of bank branch.
he aims of the study at using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) are two-fold. First, the study aims to determine the relative importance or weight of multiple criteria and its attributes in the decision problem of location selection. The second aim of the study is to identify a location with the highest potential among alternatives for retailers by using a series of criteria and attributes determined. By the means of the AHP method, decision makers put weighted values to the evaluation criteria with respect to the related goal and the attributes with respect to the corresponding criteria. In addition, the priority weight for every location alternative on each criterion and attribute is estimated. The AHP process involves hierarchically structuring decision problem, setting priority weights, establishing a judgment matrix and weight vector, and then ranking the order of location alternatives. To substantiate the feasibility of this standard approach, a case study is conducted with location selection for a clothing store in this study.
This paper through a systematic literature review portrays the academic work that has been done in disaster management by applying multi-criteria decision making. This study reviews 36 academic articles that applied multi-criteria decision-making planning and management of natural disasters i.e. tsunami, floods, heavy rains, earthquake, land sliding, epidemic, pandemic, etc. This study finds out that lack of effective planning and management pre and post disasters is causing loss of human life, temporary migration of locals to safer places, loss of properties, and economic losses. Once the crisis is over, it requires efforts and additional finances to bring life to normal. There are regions where disasters are periodic such as floods in rivers or due to monsoon season. But with effective planning and pre-determined priorities, loss to human life can be mitigated. Disaster management departments need effective planning tools to forecast imminent disasters and prepare accordingly. This study is very relevant to the recent global pandemic COVID-19 that has caused human and economic losses and will leave footprints for the coming years and generations
<p>Location selection problem in banking is an important issue for the commercial success in competitive environment. There is a strategic fit between the location selection decision and overall performance of a new branch. Providing physical service in requested location as well as alternative distribution channels to meet profitable client needs is the current problematic to achieve the competitive advantage over the rivalry in financial system. In this paper, an integrated model has been developed to support in the decision of branch location selection for a new bank branch. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique has been conducted to prioritize of evaluation criteria, and multi-objective optimization on the basis of ratio analysis (MOORA) method has been applied to rank location alternatives of bank branch. </p>
Construction contractors have a great role in terms of operation work properly in construction project management. An effective contractor selection is most important to the success of any construction projects. Contractor selection is a multi criteria decision making problem which includes qualitative and quantitative characteristics. For the contractor selection problem, this study proposes a combined decision approach, which employs analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and Fuzzy Technique Ordered Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) methods. In the proposed approach, AHP is used to determine the weights of selection criteria, and Fuzzy TOPSIS is used to select appropriate contractor alternative. Additionally, a real case study in construction industry is presented to illustrate the application of the proposed approach.
There has been an increase in the elderly population worldwide in recent years. This situation creates some needs both at individual and social level. In particular, elderly individuals need support in carrying out their daily activities. Therefore, elderly care centers are seen as an important supporter in this respect. This study aims to identify the criteria affecting the selection of elderly care centers and prioritize them with SWARA method. The SWARA method was used to weight the criteria affecting the selection of elderly care centers in order of priority. Eight criteria identified through literature review were evaluated by five experts experienced in the relevant field. The experts evaluated the criteria by ranking them according to their importance and the final prioritization was carried out by taking the geometric mean of the evaluations. According to the results of the analysis, the most important factor affecting the selection of an elderly care center was the Quality-of-Life Comfort and Service with a weight of 22%. This was followed by Financial Status with 20%, Health Services with 16%, and Professional Staff with 13%. Location and Transportation criterion was determined as the least important factor with a weight of 0.7%. The fact that life comfort and service quality have the highest weight indicates that elderly individuals expect a quality and comfortable living environment. The results obtained from the study show that policies for elderly care homes should be organized in a way that aims to increase the comfort of living, improve service quality, ensure economic accessibility and ensure the sustainability of health services.
This paper through a systematic literature review portrays the academic work that has been done in disaster management by applying multi-criteria decision making. This study reviews 36 academic articles that applied multi-criteria decision-making planning and management of natural disasters i.e. tsunami, floods, heavy rains, earthquake, land sliding, epidemic, pandemic, etc. This study finds out that lack of effective planning and management pre and post disasters is causing loss of human life, temporary migration of locals to safer places, loss of properties, and economic losses. Once the crisis is over, it requires efforts and additional finances to bring life to normal. There are regions where disasters are periodic such as floods in rivers or due to monsoon season. But with effective planning and pre-determined priorities, loss to human life can be mitigated. Disaster management departments need effective planning tools to forecast imminent disasters and prepare accordingly. This study is very relevant to the recent global pandemic COVID-19 that has caused human and economic losses and will leave footprints for the coming years and generations
Construction contractors have a great role in terms of operation work properly in construction project management. An effective contractor selection is most important to the success of any construction projects. Contractor selection is a multi criteria decision making problem which includes qualitative and quantitative characteristics. For the contractor selection problem, this study proposes a combined decision approach, which employs analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and Fuzzy Technique Ordered Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) methods. In the proposed approach, AHP is used to determine the weights of selection criteria, and Fuzzy TOPSIS is used to select appropriate contractor alternative. Additionally, a real case study in construction industry is presented to illustrate the application of the proposed approach.
<p>Location selection problem in banking is an important issue for the commercial success in competitive environment. There is a strategic fit between the location selection decision and overall performance of a new branch. Providing physical service in requested location as well as alternative distribution channels to meet profitable client needs is the current problematic to achieve the competitive advantage over the rivalry in financial system. In this paper, an integrated model has been developed to support in the decision of branch location selection for a new bank branch. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique has been conducted to prioritize of evaluation criteria, and multi-objective optimization on the basis of ratio analysis (MOORA) method has been applied to rank location alternatives of bank branch. </p>
he aims of the study at using AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) are two-fold. First, the study aims to determine the relative importance or weight of multiple criteria and its attributes in the decision problem of location selection. The second aim of the study is to identify a location with the highest potential among alternatives for retailers by using a series of criteria and attributes determined. By the means of the AHP method, decision makers put weighted values to the evaluation criteria with respect to the related goal and the attributes with respect to the corresponding criteria. In addition, the priority weight for every location alternative on each criterion and attribute is estimated. The AHP process involves hierarchically structuring decision problem, setting priority weights, establishing a judgment matrix and weight vector, and then ranking the order of location alternatives. To substantiate the feasibility of this standard approach, a case study is conducted with location selection for a clothing store in this study.
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 |