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.
Harmonized guidelines for single-laboratory validation of methods of analysis (IUPAC Technical Report)
20021.9k citationsMichael Thompson, Stephen L. R. Ellison et al.Pure and Applied Chemistryprofile →
This map shows the geographic impact of Roger Wood'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 Roger Wood with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Roger Wood more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Roger Wood. 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 Roger Wood. The network helps show where Roger Wood may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Roger Wood
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Roger Wood.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Roger Wood 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 Roger Wood. Roger Wood is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Thompson, Michael, Stephen L. R. Ellison, & Roger Wood. (2006). The International Harmonized Protocol for the proficiency testing of analytical chemistry laboratories (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure and Applied Chemistry. 78(1). 145–196.487 indexed citations breakdown →
Thompson, Michael, Stephen L. R. Ellison, & Roger Wood. (2002). Harmonized guidelines for single-laboratory validation of methods of analysis (IUPAC Technical Report). Pure and Applied Chemistry. 74(5). 835–855.1908 indexed citations breakdown →
7.
Wood, Roger, M. H. Lewis, M. R. Lees, et al.. (2002). Ferromagnetic fullerene. Journal of Physics Condensed Matter. 14(22). L385–L391.69 indexed citations
8.
Thompson, Michael, Stephen L. R. Ellison, & Roger Wood. (2002). ANALYTICAL, APPLIED, CLINICAL, INORGANIC, AND PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY DIVISIONS INTERDIVISIONAL WORKING PARTY FOR HARMONIZATION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SCHEMES FOR ANALYTICAL LABORATORIES* HARMONIZED GUIDELINES FOR SINGLE- LABORATORY VALIDATION OF METHODS OF ANALYSIS.1 indexed citations
Butcher, Gillian, Andrew D. Holland, Richard E. Cole, et al.. (1997). <title>IR detectors for the GERB instrument on MSG</title>. Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE. 3122. 384–391.1 indexed citations
Thompson, Michael & Roger Wood. (1993). INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PURE AND APPLIED CHEMISTRY ANALYTICAL, APPLIED, CLINICAL, INORGANIC AND PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY DIVISIONS INTERDIVISIONAL WORKING PARTY FOR HARMONIZATION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE SCHEMES FOR ANALYTICAL LABORATORIES* THE INTERNATIONAL HARMONIZED PROTOCOL FOR THE PROFICIENCY TESTING OF (CHEMICAL) ANALYTICAL LABORATORIES.4 indexed citations
16.
Wood, Roger, Peter Townsend, G.P. Pells, & Mary Murphy. (1990). “Anomalous” fading in irradiated α-Al2O3. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section B Beam Interactions with Materials and Atoms. 46(1-4). 189–193.10 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.