This map shows the geographic impact of W Weimar'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 W Weimar with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites W Weimar more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by W Weimar. 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 W Weimar. The network helps show where W Weimar may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of W Weimar
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of W Weimar.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of W Weimar 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 W Weimar. W Weimar is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Stegmann, Alexander P.A., et al.. (2002). The presence of immune stimulatory cells in fresh and cryopreserved donor aortic and pulmonary valve allografts.. PubMed. 11(3). 315–24; discussion 325.23 indexed citations
8.
Stegmann, Alexander P.A., et al.. (2000). Induction of cytotoxic T lymphocytes with destructive potential after cardiac valve homograft implantation.. PubMed. 9(6). 761–8.10 indexed citations
9.
Weimar, W, et al.. (1995). Peripheral blood monitoring during and after rejection-prophylaxis with a monoclonal anti-interleukin-2-receptor antibody in kidney and heart transplant recipients.. PubMed. 27(1). 856–8.2 indexed citations
10.
Baan, Carla C., et al.. (1995). Immunological monitoring in peripheral blood after heart transplantation: frequencies of T-helper cells and precursors of cytotoxic T cells with high avidity for donor antigens correlate with rejection.. PubMed. 27(1). 485–7.4 indexed citations
11.
Baan, Carla C., L. M. B. Vaessen, Aggie H.M.M. Balk, et al.. (1994). Cyclosporin A sensitivity of allo-specific precursor and committed cytotoxic T lymphocytes after clinical heart transplantation.. PubMed. 26(5). 2849–51.2 indexed citations
12.
Jutte, N. H. P. M., et al.. (1993). Lysis of endothelial cells by graft-infiltrating lymphocytes after clinical heart transplantation.. PubMed. 25(1 Pt 1). 100–1.1 indexed citations
13.
Metselaar, Herold J. & W Weimar. (1992). Prevention of cytomegalovirus infection after organ transplantation with passive immunization. An analysis of 6 randomized clinical trials.. PubMed. 30. 198–202.1 indexed citations
14.
Weimar, W, et al.. (1991). On the relation between cytomegalovirus infection and rejection after heart transplantation.. PubMed. 52(1). 162–4.15 indexed citations
Jeekel, J, et al.. (1987). T cell subset analysis predicts virus infection but not rejection in cyclosporine A-treated renal allograft recipients.. PubMed. 19(1 Pt 3). 2181–2.2 indexed citations
18.
Weimar, W, et al.. (1985). The incidence of cytomegalo- and herpes simplex virus infections in renal allograft recipients treated with high dose recombinant leucocyte interferon: a controlled study.. PubMed. 92. 37–9.14 indexed citations
19.
Weimar, W, K. E. Mogensen, & K Cantell. (1982). Highly purified leucocyte interferons for renal transplant recipients.. PubMed. 36(2). 94–7.2 indexed citations
20.
Weimar, W, et al.. (1979). Prophylactic use of interferon in renal allograft recipients.. PubMed. 11(1). 69–70.4 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.