This map shows the geographic impact of F Maluenda'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 F Maluenda with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites F Maluenda more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by F Maluenda. 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 F Maluenda. The network helps show where F Maluenda may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of F Maluenda
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of F Maluenda.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of F Maluenda 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 F Maluenda. F Maluenda is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Burdiles, Patricio, et al.. (1999). Prevalence of common bile duct stones according to the increasing number of risk factors present. A prospective study employing routinely intraoperative cholangiography in 477 cases.. PubMed. 45(23). 1415–21.16 indexed citations
7.
Csendes, Attila, et al.. (1996). Counts of bacteria and pyocites of choledochal bile in controls and in patients with gallstones or common bile duct stones with or without acute cholangitis.. PubMed. 43(10). 800–6.35 indexed citations
8.
Maluenda, F, et al.. (1996). Prospective study of esophageal motor abnormalities in patients with gastroesophageal disease reflux according to the severity of endoscopic esophagitis.. PubMed. 43(8). 394–9.15 indexed citations
9.
Csendes, Attila, et al.. (1996). Bacteriological studies of liver parenchyma in controls and in patients with gallstones or common bile duct stones with or without acute cholangitis.. PubMed. 42(6). 821–6.10 indexed citations
Burdiles, Patricio, et al.. (1994). Late results of primary repair and follow-up in 53 patients with injuries to the common bile duct occurring during cholecystectomy (distal perforation, tears, ligation or suture).. PubMed. 41(2). 195–200.3 indexed citations
Csendes, Attila, et al.. (1992). Indications and results of hepaticojejunostomy in benign strictures of the biliary tract.. PubMed. 39(4). 333–6.26 indexed citations
Csendes, Attila, et al.. (1991). [Prevalence of gallbladder neoplasms in cholecystectomies].. PubMed. 119(8). 887–90.7 indexed citations
16.
Csendes, Attila, Juan Carlos Díaz, Patricio Burdiles, et al.. (1990). Classification and treatment of anastomotic leakage after extended total gastrectomy in gastric carcinoma.. PubMed. 37 Suppl 2. 174–7.47 indexed citations
17.
Burdiles, Patricio, Attila Csendes, Juan Carlos Díaz, et al.. (1989). Histological analysis of liver parenchyma and choledochal wall, and external diameter and intraluminal pressure of the common bile duct in controls and patients with common bile duct stones with and without acute suppurative cholangitis.. PubMed. 36(3). 143–6.10 indexed citations
18.
Csendes, Attila, et al.. (1989). Late results of immediate primary end to end repair in accidental section of the common bile duct.. PubMed. 168(2). 125–30.34 indexed citations
19.
Maluenda, F, et al.. (1989). Bacteriological study of choledochal bile in patients with common bile duct stones, with or without acute suppurative cholangitis.. PubMed. 36(3). 132–5.70 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.