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 07:22 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 02:15 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
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): 2026-10-21T07:22:57.862807+00:00 — 2026-10-22T02:15:09.836064+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 | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 1 | 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 |
|---|---|
| 2024 | 2 |
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 | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1.0 | 1 | 100.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1/1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
This study examines the effect of reasonable accommodations on the wellbeing of students with impairments. It utilises the accounts of fifteen students with disabilities in a South African university. It utilises a blend of snowball and convenience sampling methods, collecting data via individual semi-structured interviews. The study uncovers a multifaceted relationship between the positives and drawbacks of disability support services. Although these services enhance students' overall wellbeing, they can unintentionally induce illbeing, so underscoring the contradictory impacts of reasonable accommodations. This dichotomy emphasises the necessity for a holistic approach to disability support and a reform of the higher education system to address diversity comprehensively. The results have ramifications for disability management in higher education institutions. A critical evaluation of the quality of disability services is necessary to discover and alleviate unanticipated adverse effects that may cause discomfort and disadvantages to students with impairments.
The phenomenon of 'massification in higher education ', which refers to the significant increase in the number of students enrolling in universities, has made it difficult for inclusive education to be attainable owing to unknown reasons that are encumbering the students living with disability from having a sense of belonging. Hence, this study aims to evaluate the relationship between students living with disability and social justice through inclusivity in higher education with the aid of Assistive Technology (AT) to conceptualise a framework. The researchers employed a mixed methods approach to collect and analyse data statistically and descriptively. The requirements for integrating the model to ease the lack of consideration of students living with disability in the digital age were evaluated and critically reviewed regarding its impact on students’ sense of belonging in the digital age. The major findings from this study elucidate the factors perceived as the central requirements for mitigating the lack of inclusivity and social justice in higher education. The procurement of ATs was topical as most respondents (83%) categorically opined the need to improve this process by making timely purchases of the proper ATs from reliable service providers. The successful implementation of this framework could significantly enhance the educational experience of students with disabilities at the University of Venda, making it a more inclusive and supportive learning environment. The findings on the appropriateness of ATs for students overwhelmingly indicated that many of the available devices and technologies meant to assist learners were not fit for the tasks they were intended for. The university should establish a procurement committee and a high-level action plan outlining the requirements for delivering assistive products & services.
This study examines the effect of reasonable accommodations on the wellbeing of students with impairments. It utilises the accounts of fifteen students with disabilities in a South African university. It utilises a blend of snowball and convenience sampling methods, collecting data via individual semi-structured interviews. The study uncovers a multifaceted relationship between the positives and drawbacks of disability support services. Although these services enhance students' overall wellbeing, they can unintentionally induce illbeing, so underscoring the contradictory impacts of reasonable accommodations. This dichotomy emphasises the necessity for a holistic approach to disability support and a reform of the higher education system to address diversity comprehensively. The results have ramifications for disability management in higher education institutions. A critical evaluation of the quality of disability services is necessary to discover and alleviate unanticipated adverse effects that may cause discomfort and disadvantages to students with impairments.
The phenomenon of 'massification in higher education ', which refers to the significant increase in the number of students enrolling in universities, has made it difficult for inclusive education to be attainable owing to unknown reasons that are encumbering the students living with disability from having a sense of belonging. Hence, this study aims to evaluate the relationship between students living with disability and social justice through inclusivity in higher education with the aid of Assistive Technology (AT) to conceptualise a framework. The researchers employed a mixed methods approach to collect and analyse data statistically and descriptively. The requirements for integrating the model to ease the lack of consideration of students living with disability in the digital age were evaluated and critically reviewed regarding its impact on students’ sense of belonging in the digital age. The major findings from this study elucidate the factors perceived as the central requirements for mitigating the lack of inclusivity and social justice in higher education. The procurement of ATs was topical as most respondents (83%) categorically opined the need to improve this process by making timely purchases of the proper ATs from reliable service providers. The successful implementation of this framework could significantly enhance the educational experience of students with disabilities at the University of Venda, making it a more inclusive and supportive learning environment. The findings on the appropriateness of ATs for students overwhelmingly indicated that many of the available devices and technologies meant to assist learners were not fit for the tasks they were intended for. The university should establish a procurement committee and a high-level action plan outlining the requirements for delivering assistive products & services.
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 |