EHU Press

Leioa, Vizcaya, Spain · Member ID: 352 · 12,172 total works

Global Rank

#5,799

of 28,259

Percentile

Top 21%

of all publishers

To Reach Top 10%

+12

points needed

View Full Leaderboard

Nearby in Rankings:

#5797Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)(26 pts)#5798Japanese Society of Animal Reproduction(26 pts)#5800Association for Vascular Access(26 pts)#5801Society of Computer Chemistry Japan(26 pts)

Nexus Score

25/ 100

+16 points vs historical

Score Breakdown by Era

Current

Last 2 years

#5,501

1,032 works

Backfile

Older than 2 years

#5,799

11,140 works

Ranked #5,501 for recent publications vs #5,799 overall — improving with recent work

Dimension Breakdown

Provenance

References, update policies, similarity check

5.1 / 25

People

ORCID coverage

6.2 / 20

Organizations

Affiliations and ROR IDs

0.0 / 15

Funding

Funder registry and award numbers

0.0 / 20

Access

Licenses, full-text links, abstracts

14.1 / 20

Score by Content Type

Scores calculated separately for each content type registered with Crossref. The aggregate score above includes all types.

Content Type	Score	Grade	Prov	People	Orgs	Fund	Access
Journal ArticlesTOP	19	F	20%	13%	0%	0%	55%
Monographs	13	F	0%	0%	0%	38%	26%
Book Chapters	11	F	18%	0%	0%	0%	30%
Proceedings	2	F	7%	0%	0%	0%	0%

Non-article content types (reviews, components, corrections) typically have lower metadata coverage, which can reduce the aggregate score above.

Why doesn't the leaderboard use per-type scores? Deciding which content types count as "primary research" is subjective and varies by discipline and publisher model. The leaderboard uses Crossref's aggregate coverage to ensure a consistent, comparable baseline across all 27,000+ publishers. This per-type breakdown lets you see the full picture for any individual publisher.

Detailed Metrics

Metric	Coverage	Points	Status
References provenance	2%	0.4 / 15	Poor
Update Policies provenance	0%	0.0 / 5	Poor
Similarity Check provenance	99%	5.0 / 5	Excellent
ORCID Coverage people	52%	10.4 / 20	Good
Affiliations (Text) organizations	0%	0.0 / 5	Poor
ROR IDs organizations	0%	0.0 / 10	Poor
Funder Registry funding	0%	0.0 / 10	Poor
Award Numbers funding	0%	0.0 / 10	Poor
Licenses access	81%	5.7 / 7	Excellent
Full-text Links access	99%	6.9 / 7	Excellent
Abstracts access	87%	5.2 / 6	Excellent

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

Small metadata improvements can significantly boost your score. Here are the highest-impact changes you can make:

Improve Funding

+16 pts potential

Include funder information using Open Funder Registry IDs and grant/award numbers.

Current: 0% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve Provenance

+15 pts potential

Add reference lists to your DOI deposits. Even partial references help establish citation links.

Current: 21% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Improve Organizations

+12 pts potential

Add author affiliations with ROR IDs. The ROR API can help match institution names to IDs.

Current: 0% coverageView Crossref Documentation →

Pro Tip: Focus on your current (recent) publications first. Improving metadata on new deposits is easier than updating backfiles, and it will immediately improve your "current" coverage scores.

EHU Press

Score Breakdown by Era

Dimension Breakdown

Score by Content Type

Detailed Metrics

Quick Wins to Improve Your Ranking

Improve Funding

Improve Provenance

Improve Organizations

Improvement Recommendations

Deposit Complete References

Add ROR IDs for Affiliations

Add Funder Information

Include Award/Grant Numbers

Include Author Affiliations

About This Score

Crossref Reports

Share Results