Chad E.N. Reiter
- Molecular Biology top 10%
- Ophthalmology top 1%
- Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging top 5%
- Neurology top 5%
- Clinical Biochemistry top 5%
- Co-authors
- Thomas W. GardnerDavid A. AntonettiAlistair J. BarberMakoto NakamuraSarah K. BronsonE WolpertRohit SoansSteven W. Levison
- Topics
- Retinal Diseases and Treatments (8 papers)Retinal Development and Disorders (8 papers)FOXO transcription factor regulation (3 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesSouth KoreaIndonesia
In The Last Decade
Chad E.N. Reiter
17 papers receiving 1.4k citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 81
- Molecular Biology 771
- Ophthalmology 627
- Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging 262
- Neurology 152
- Clinical Biochemistry 150
Countries citing papers authored by Chad E.N. Reiter
This map shows the geographic impact of Chad E.N. Reiter'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 Chad E.N. Reiter with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Chad E.N. Reiter more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Chad E.N. Reiter
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Chad E.N. Reiter. 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 Chad E.N. Reiter. The network helps show where Chad E.N. Reiter may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Chad E.N. Reiter
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Chad E.N. Reiter. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Chad E.N. Reiter 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 Chad E.N. Reiter. Chad E.N. Reiter is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | |
| 2 | 10 | |
| 3 | 13 | |
| 4 | 21 | |
| 5 | 65 | |
| 6 | 83 | |
| 7 | 81 | |
| 8 | 37 | |
| 9 | Diabetes Rapidly Impairs Global Rates of Protein Synthesis in the Retina: A Potential Mechanism for Cellular Dysfunction | 1 |
| 10 | 146 | |
| 11 | 400 | |
| 12 | The Ins2Akita mouse as a model of diabetic retinopathy | 1 |
| 13 | 74 | |
| 14 | 19 | |
| 15 | 91 | |
| 16 | 101 | |
| 17 | 252 | |
| 18 | 17 |
About Chad E.N. Reiter
Chad E.N. Reiter is a scholar working on Ophthalmology, Molecular Biology and Cell Biology, having authored 18 papers that have together received 1.4k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Retinal Diseases and Treatments (8 papers), Retinal Development and Disorders (8 papers) and FOXO transcription factor regulation (3 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Ophthalmology (627 citations), Clinical Biochemistry (150 citations) and Neurology (152 citations). Chad E.N. Reiter has collaborated with scholars based in United States, South Korea and Indonesia. Frequent co-authors include Thomas W. Gardner, David A. Antonetti, Alistair J. Barber, Makoto Nakamura, Sarah K. Bronson, E Wolpert, Rohit Soans, Steven W. Levison, J. Kyle Krady and Timothy S. Kern. Their work appears in journals such as Journal of Biological Chemistry, Journal of Clinical Investigation and PLoS ONE.
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.