Sanofi’s Solvent Selection Guide: A Step Toward More Sustainable Processes
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1021/op4002565 →Countries where authors are citing Sanofi’s Solvent Selection Guide: A Step Toward More Sustainable Processes
This map shows the geographic impact of Sanofi’s Solvent Selection Guide: A Step Toward More Sustainable Processes. 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 Sanofi’s Solvent Selection Guide: A Step Toward More Sustainable Processes with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Sanofi’s Solvent Selection Guide: A Step Toward More Sustainable Processes more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Sanofi’s Solvent Selection Guide: A Step Toward More Sustainable Processes
This network shows the impact of Sanofi’s Solvent Selection Guide: A Step Toward More Sustainable Processes. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Sanofi’s Solvent Selection Guide: A Step Toward More Sustainable Processes.
About Sanofi’s Solvent Selection Guide: A Step Toward More Sustainable Processes
This paper, published in 2013, received 516 indexed citations . Written by Denis Prat, Olivier Pardigon, Hans‐Wolfram Flemming, P. Isnard, Eberhard Guntrum and Paul Cruciani covering the research area of Environmental Chemistry, Control and Systems Engineering and Physical and Theoretical Chemistry. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Environmental Chemistry (248 citations), Organic Chemistry (222 citations) and Biomedical Engineering (107 citations). Published in Organic Process Research & Development.
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/op4002565.