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.
Uveal melanoma
2020495 citationsColleen M. Cebulla, Mohamed H. Abdel‐Rahman et al.profile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by Colleen M. Cebulla
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Colleen M. Cebulla'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 Colleen M. Cebulla with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Colleen M. Cebulla more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Colleen M. Cebulla
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Colleen M. Cebulla. 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 Colleen M. Cebulla. The network helps show where Colleen M. Cebulla may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Colleen M. Cebulla
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Colleen M. Cebulla.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Colleen M. Cebulla 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 Colleen M. Cebulla. Colleen M. Cebulla is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Massengill, James B., et al.. (2021). BAP1 status and response to radiation in melanoma. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 62(8). 2872–2872.1 indexed citations
5.
Choi, Stacey S., Elaine M. Wells-Gray, Heping Xu, et al.. (2019). Adaptive Optics OCT-Based Drusen Grading for Assessing Severity of Dry Age-Related Macular Degeneration. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 60(9). 3465–3465.1 indexed citations
Kendra, Kari, et al.. (2017). Ocular side effects of novel and traditional chemotherapeutic agents. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 58(8). 5166–5166.
10.
Binkley, Elaine M., et al.. (2016). Ocular side effects of traditional chemotherapeutics and small molecule inhibitors. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 57(12). 299–299.
11.
Boru, Getachew, et al.. (2016). Mechanisms of somatic biallelic inactivation of BAP1 in uveal melanoma. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 57(12). 5895–5895.1 indexed citations
Tarabishy, Ahmad B., et al.. (2013). Optos fundus imaging in patients with keratoprosthesis. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 54(15). 3594–3594.
17.
Abdel‐Rahman, Mohamed H., et al.. (2011). Monosomy 3 Status of Metastatic Uveal Melanomas is Associated with Rapidly Aggressive, Therapy-Resistant Tumors. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 52(14). 5383–5383.1 indexed citations
Murray, Timothy G., et al.. (2007). Targeting the Tumor Microenvironment as a Therapeutic Strategy for Retinoblastoma. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 48(13). 1585–1585.1 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.