Cited by 237Efficiency Analysis Using DEABanking stability, regulation, efficiencyBanking Sector Performance and Management

Association of DEA super-efficiency estimates with financial ratios: Investigating the case for Chinese banks

Avkiran, Necmi K.·2011·Omega

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.omega.2010.08.001

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Avkiran, N. K.
Affiliations
The University of Queensland (AU)
Corresponding author
Avkiran, Necmi K.
Venue
Omega
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-06
Volume
39
Issue
3
Pages
323-334
ISSN
0305-0483 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2052658730
Cited by
237
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 15
FWCI
18.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Omega (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Efficiency Analysis Using DEA
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Banking stability, regulation, efficiency
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Banking Sector Performance and Management
Keywords
data envelopment analysis, super-efficiency DEA, bank efficiency, financial ratios, slack-based measure, profit efficiency, return on equity, benchmarking, Chinese banks

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review