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.
Gastric cancer: Classification, histology and application of molecular pathology.
2012383 citationsBing Hu, N Lammert et al.PubMedprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Robert Barnes'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 Robert Barnes with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Robert Barnes more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Robert Barnes. 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 Robert Barnes. The network helps show where Robert Barnes may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Robert Barnes
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Robert Barnes.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Robert Barnes 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 Robert Barnes. Robert Barnes is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Hu, Bing, et al.. (2012). Gastric cancer: Classification, histology and application of molecular pathology.. PubMed. 3(3). 251–61.383 indexed citations breakdown →
Barnes, Robert, et al.. (1993). Fat absorption in patients with functional intestinal lymphangiectasia and lymphangiectic cysts.. PubMed. 88(6). 887–90.6 indexed citations
8.
Barnes, Robert, Edward A. Barker, Ariella M. Rosengard, et al.. (1991). Low nm23 protein expression in infiltrating ductal breast carcinomas correlates with reduced patient survival.. PubMed. 139(2). 245–50.146 indexed citations
9.
Yancey, Robert J., et al.. (1990). Efficacy of pirlimycin hydrochloride in the treatment of experimentally induced chronic staphylococcal mastitis in lactating dairy cows.. Journal of Dairy Science. 73.2 indexed citations
10.
Siddiqui, Tariq, et al.. (1990). Vascular transformation of lymph node sinuses. A process displaying a spectrum of histologic features.. PubMed. 114(7). 656–60.14 indexed citations
Vena, John E., Harry A. Sultz, George L. Carlo, Roger C. Fiedler, & Robert Barnes. (1987). Sources of bias in retrospective cohort mortality studies: a note on treatment of subjects lost to follow-up.. PubMed. 29(3). 256–61.18 indexed citations
13.
Vena, John E., Diane L. Cookfair, Roger C. Fiedler, & Robert Barnes. (1986). Mortality of a municipal worker cohort: II. Females. American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 9(2). 159–169.5 indexed citations
14.
Vena, John E., Harry A. Sultz, Roger C. Fiedler, Robert Barnes, & George L. Carlo. (1985). Mortality of a municipal worker cohort: I. Males. American Journal of Industrial Medicine. 7(3). 241–252.11 indexed citations
15.
Barnes, Robert. (1969). OBSTETRICS IN NEW GUINEA. The Medical Journal of Australia. 1(19). 969–973.1 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.