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.
Plasmid-Mediated Resistance to Vancomycin and Teicoplanin in Enterococcus Faecium
19881.2k citationsRoland Leclercq, E Derlot et al.New England Journal of Medicineprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of E Derlot'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 E Derlot with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites E Derlot more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by E Derlot. 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 E Derlot. The network helps show where E Derlot may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of E Derlot
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of E Derlot.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of E Derlot 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 E Derlot. E Derlot is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
17 of 17 papers shown
1.
Chanal, Marie, et al.. (1994). [In vitro antibacterial activity of cefpirome: a new cephalosporin; results of a multicenter study].. PubMed. 42(8). 754–60.2 indexed citations
Soussy, C.-J., M Kitzis, C. Chanal, G. Carret, & E Derlot. (1991). [In vitro antibacterial activity of piperacillin-tazobactam combination on hospital isolates and regression curve].. PubMed. 39(5). 367–73.2 indexed citations
6.
Soussy, Claude–James, M Meyran, Marie Chanal, et al.. (1991). [In vitro antibacterial activity of a new oral cephalosporin, ceftibuten. Results of a multicenter study].. PubMed. 39(5). 396–402.4 indexed citations
7.
Soussy, C.-J., M Kitzis, M Meyran, et al.. (1991). [In vitro antibacterial activity of a new fluoroquinolone, temafloxacin, against hospital isolates. Results of a multicenter study].. PubMed. 39(5). 403–9.1 indexed citations
Thabaut, A, et al.. (1989). [In vitro antibacterial activity of a new macrolide, miokamycin. Results of a multicenter study].. PubMed. 37(5). 358–63.1 indexed citations
Leclercq, Roland, E Derlot, Jean Duval, & Patrice Courvalin. (1988). Plasmid-Mediated Resistance to Vancomycin and Teicoplanin in Enterococcus Faecium. New England Journal of Medicine. 319(3). 157–161.1162 indexed citations breakdown →
13.
Tekaia, Fredj, E Derlot, Jean‐Michel Claverie, & Patrice Courvalin. (1987). [Quality control of multicenter evaluation studies of the in vitro activity of antibiotics].. PubMed. 35(5 Pt 2). 687–91.2 indexed citations
14.
Derlot, E, et al.. (1986). [A study by the National Reference Center for Antibiotics on inocula for antibiotic sensitivity testing].. PubMed. 34(5). 317–9.7 indexed citations
Wahl, R., et al.. (1960). [Unusual pathogenic power of Streptococcus, in rugose colonies, of type 39 of group A. Immunological study of their Lancefield extracts].. PubMed. 99. 654–63.2 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.