National population‐based estimates for major birth defects, 2010–2014

525 indexed citations

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 2019, received 525 indexed citations. Written by T. Cara, Jennifer Isenburg, Mark A. Canfield, Robert E. Meyer, Adolfo Correa, Clinton J. Alverson, Philip J. Lupo, Tiffany Riehle‐Colarusso, Sook Ja Cho and Deepa Aggarwal covering the research area of Genetics, Rheumatology and Surgery. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Surgery (165 citations), Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (139 citations) and Genetics (129 citations). Published in Birth Defects Research.

Countries where authors are citing National population‐based estimates for major birth defects, 2010–2014

Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of National population‐based estimates for major birth defects, 2010–2014. 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 National population‐based estimates for major birth defects, 2010–2014 with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites National population‐based estimates for major birth defects, 2010–2014 more than expected).

Fields of papers citing National population‐based estimates for major birth defects, 2010–2014

Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of National population‐based estimates for major birth defects, 2010–2014. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the National population‐based estimates for major birth defects, 2010–2014.

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.

This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1002/bdr2.1589.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026