Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
Micafungin versus Caspofungin for Treatment of Candidemia and Other Forms of Invasive Candidiasis
2007478 citationsPeter G. Pappas, Robert F. Betts et al.Clinical Infectious Diseasesprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of B Dupont's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by B Dupont with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites B Dupont more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by B Dupont. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by B Dupont. The network helps show where B Dupont may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of B Dupont
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of B Dupont.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of B Dupont based on the total number of
citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges
represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together.
Node borders
signify the number of papers an author published with B Dupont. B Dupont is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Pappas, Peter G., Robert F. Betts, Márcio Nucci, et al.. (2007). Micafungin versus Caspofungin for Treatment of Candidemia and Other Forms of Invasive Candidiasis. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 45(7). 883–893.478 indexed citations breakdown →
3.
Dupont, B. (2002). AN EPIDEMIOLOGICAL REVIEW OF SYSTEMIC FUNGAL INFECTIONS. Journal de Mycologie Médicale. 12(4). 163–173.9 indexed citations
Pialoux, Gilles, et al.. (1992). [Lung abscess caused by Rhodococcus (Corynebacterium) equi in HIV infection. Two cases].. PubMed. 21(9). 417–21.4 indexed citations
Dupont, B, David W. Warnock, & Malcolm Richardson. (1990). Clinical manifestations and management of candidosis in the compromised patient.. 55–83.15 indexed citations
14.
Milleron, B., et al.. (1990). [Semi-invasive aspergillosis with involvement of the thoracic wall cured by itraconazole].. PubMed. 46(4). 175–7.4 indexed citations
15.
Roux, Peter Le, et al.. (1988). [Cryptococcal hygroma of the elbow. Spontaneous mycological remission].. PubMed. 17(2). 81–2.1 indexed citations
16.
Drouhet, E. & B Dupont. (1987). Mycotic infections complicating heroin addicts, AIDS and other immunocompromised host conditions.. PubMed. 23(4). 735–42.1 indexed citations
17.
Dupont, B, et al.. (1985). [Osteoarthritis caused by dematiaceous fungi. Apropos of 3 cases].. PubMed. 136(5). 393–7.15 indexed citations
18.
Dupont, B & E. Drouhet. (1982). [Histoplamosis in otorhinolaryngology].. PubMed. 99(12). 547–51.1 indexed citations
19.
Drouhet, E. & B Dupont. (1981). Ostéoarthrites à champignons.. 48(2).7 indexed citations
20.
Dupont, B. (1976). [Phlebitis of infectious etiology].. PubMed. 29(2). 133–9.1 indexed citations
Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive
bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global
research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include
incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and
delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in
Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.