Enantiomerically Pure Cyclobutane Derivatives and Their Use in Organic Synthesis
Impact in
Classified as
- Journal
- Chemical Reviews
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1021/cr010013a →Countries where authors are citing Enantiomerically Pure Cyclobutane Derivatives and Their Use in Organic Synthesis
This map shows the geographic impact of Enantiomerically Pure Cyclobutane Derivatives and Their Use in Organic Synthesis. 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 Enantiomerically Pure Cyclobutane Derivatives and Their Use in Organic Synthesis with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Enantiomerically Pure Cyclobutane Derivatives and Their Use in Organic Synthesis more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Enantiomerically Pure Cyclobutane Derivatives and Their Use in Organic Synthesis
This network shows the impact of Enantiomerically Pure Cyclobutane Derivatives and Their Use in Organic Synthesis. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Enantiomerically Pure Cyclobutane Derivatives and Their Use in Organic Synthesis.
About Enantiomerically Pure Cyclobutane Derivatives and Their Use in Organic Synthesis
This paper, published in 2003, received 519 indexed citations . Written by Edward Lee‐Ruff and Gabriela Mladenova covering the research area of Organic Chemistry and Molecular Biology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Organic Chemistry (487 citations), Inorganic Chemistry (80 citations), Molecular Biology (58 citations), Pharmaceutical Science (44 citations) and Materials Chemistry (25 citations). Published in Chemical Reviews.
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/10.1021/cr010013a.