Erik Van de Kelft
- Surgery top 5%
- Pathology and Forensic Medicine top 2%
- Pharmacology top 5%
- Neurology top 10%
- Biomedical Engineering
- Co-authors
- Francesco CostaF. SchilsPaul M. ParizelJohan Van GoethemJean‐Pierre Van BuytenLuc HeytensMarc PeetersJan Van Zundert
- Topics
- Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology (27 papers)Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation (17 papers)Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques (11 papers)
- Partner nations
- BelgiumNetherlandsGermany
In The Last Decade
Erik Van de Kelft
46 papers receiving 992 citations
Hit Papers
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 77
- Surgery 642
- Pathology and Forensic Medicine 575
- Pharmacology 210
- Neurology 129
- Biomedical Engineering 119
Countries citing papers authored by Erik Van de Kelft
This map shows the geographic impact of Erik Van de Kelft'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 Erik Van de Kelft with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Erik Van de Kelft more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Erik Van de Kelft
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Erik Van de Kelft. 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 Erik Van de Kelft. The network helps show where Erik Van de Kelft may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Erik Van de Kelft
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Erik Van de Kelft. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Erik Van de Kelft 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 Erik Van de Kelft. Erik Van de Kelft 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 | 1 | |
| 3 | 3 | |
| 4 | 0 | |
| 5 | 0 | |
| 6 | 0 | |
| 7 | Epidemiology of spinal metastases, metastatic epidural spinal cord compression and pathologic vertebral compression fractures in patients with solid tumors: A systematic reviewbreakdown → | 92 |
| 8 | 13 | |
| 9 | 5 | |
| 10 | 17 | |
| 11 | 6 | |
| 12 | 18 | |
| 13 | 50 | |
| 14 | 13 | |
| 15 | 4 | |
| 16 | 19 | |
| 17 | 28 | |
| 18 | 41 | |
| 19 | 17 | |
| 20 | 5 |
About Erik Van de Kelft
Erik Van de Kelft is a scholar working on Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Pharmacology and Neurology, having authored 51 papers that have together received 1.0k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology (27 papers), Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation (17 papers) and Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques (11 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Pathology and Forensic Medicine (575 citations), Surgery (642 citations) and Pharmacology (210 citations). Erik Van de Kelft has collaborated with scholars based in Belgium, Netherlands and Germany. Frequent co-authors include Francesco Costa, F. Schils, Paul M. Parizel, Johan Van Goethem, Jean‐Pierre Van Buyten, Luc Heytens, Marc Peeters, Jan Van Zundert, Luc van den Hauwe and A. M. A. De Schepper. Their work appears in journals such as Stroke, Pain and Spine.
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.