Nicholas Freestone

15 papers receiving 314 citations

Peers

Nicholas Freestone
Comparison fields: 5 of 76
  • Equine 12
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine 107
  • Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism 62
  • Molecular Biology 156
  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience 39
Replace Robert E. Garfield with:
Robert E. Garfield United States
Kirk W. Evanson United States
Chang‐Qing Gao China
Panagiotis Mylonas Greece
Ágnes Nemeskéri Hungary
Paola Vázquez-Cárdenas Mexico
Nagambika Munaganuru United States
Michael Curley United Kingdom
Garfield G. Mingo United States
David Strich Israel
Nicholas Freestone relative to Robert E. Garfield United States Robert E. Garfield's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×
Robert E. Garfield · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Nicholas Freestone

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Nicholas Freestone'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 Nicholas Freestone with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Nicholas Freestone more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Nicholas Freestone

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Nicholas Freestone. 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 Nicholas Freestone. The network helps show where Nicholas Freestone may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Nicholas Freestone, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Nicholas Freestone Line = papers co-authored together Nicholas Freestone links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

17 of 17 papers shown
#Work
1 199698
2 199951
3 200133
4 200024
5 199923
6
The effects of oxytocin and progestagens on myometrial contractility in vitro during equine pregnancy.
200020
7 200912
8 202211
9 200111
10 201711
11 20199
12 19969
13 20015
14 20172
15 19942
16 20250
17 20250

About Nicholas Freestone

Nicholas Freestone is a scholar working on Molecular Biology, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Immunology and Education, having authored 17 papers that have together received 321 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias (6 papers), Ion channel regulation and function (6 papers), Receptor Mechanisms and Signaling (3 papers), Cardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies (3 papers), Reproductive System and Pregnancy (2 papers), Evaluation of Teaching Practices (2 papers), Reflective Practices in Education (2 papers) and Student Assessment and Feedback (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Equine (12 citations), Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine (107 citations), Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism (62 citations), Molecular Biology (156 citations) and Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience (39 citations). Nicholas Freestone has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, Germany and Slovenia. Frequent co-authors include Samo Ribarič, William T. Mason, Alberto J. Kaumann, Peter Molenaar, Doreen Sarsero, Roland Vetter, Michaela Scheuermann‐Freestone, Thomas Langenickel, Roland Willenbrock and Rainer Dietz. Their work appears in journals such as Biochemical Journal, Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry, Emerging Topics in Life Sciences, Drug Discovery Today and Pflügers Archiv - European Journal of Physiology.

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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact