Direct Fabrication and Harvesting of Monodisperse, Shape-Specific Nanobiomaterials
Countries where authors are citing Direct Fabrication and Harvesting of Monodisperse, Shape-Specific Nanobiomaterials
This map shows the geographic impact of Direct Fabrication and Harvesting of Monodisperse, Shape-Specific Nanobiomaterials. 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 Direct Fabrication and Harvesting of Monodisperse, Shape-Specific Nanobiomaterials with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Direct Fabrication and Harvesting of Monodisperse, Shape-Specific Nanobiomaterials more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Direct Fabrication and Harvesting of Monodisperse, Shape-Specific Nanobiomaterials
This network shows the impact of Direct Fabrication and Harvesting of Monodisperse, Shape-Specific Nanobiomaterials. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Direct Fabrication and Harvesting of Monodisperse, Shape-Specific Nanobiomaterials.
About Direct Fabrication and Harvesting of Monodisperse, Shape-Specific Nanobiomaterials
This paper, published in 2005, received 677 indexed citations . Written by Jason P. Rolland, Benjamin W. Maynor, Larken E. Euliss, Ginger M. Denison and Joseph M. DeSimone covering the research area of Surfaces, Coatings and Films and Biomedical Engineering. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Biomedical Engineering (375 citations), Biomaterials (246 citations) and Materials Chemistry (180 citations). Published in Journal of the American Chemical Society.
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/ja051977c.