Trail making test: normative values from 287 normal adult controls
- Journal
- The Italian Journal of Neurological Sciences
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1007/bf01997792 →Countries where authors are citing Trail making test: normative values from 287 normal adult controls
This map shows the geographic impact of Trail making test: normative values from 287 normal adult controls. 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 Trail making test: normative values from 287 normal adult controls with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Trail making test: normative values from 287 normal adult controls more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Trail making test: normative values from 287 normal adult controls
This network shows the impact of Trail making test: normative values from 287 normal adult controls. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Trail making test: normative values from 287 normal adult controls.
About Trail making test: normative values from 287 normal adult controls
This paper, published in 1996, received 917 indexed citations . Written by Anna Rıta Gıovagnolı, M. Del Pesce, Marcella Laiacona and Erminio Capitani covering the research area of Epidemiology, Neurology and Psychiatry and Mental health. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Psychiatry and Mental health (386 citations), Cognitive Neuroscience (383 citations) and Neurology (185 citations). Published in The Italian Journal of Neurological Sciences.
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/10.1007/bf01997792.