Comparative genomes of Chlamydia pneumoniae and C. trachomatis

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 1950, received 559 indexed citations. Written by Sue Kalman, Wayne Mitchell, C. J. Lammel, Jun Fan, Richard W. Hyman, Lynn Olinger, Jane Grimwood, Ronald W. Davis and Richard S. Stephens covering the research area of Epidemiology, Molecular Biology and Microbiology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Microbiology (401 citations), Epidemiology (224 citations) and Molecular Biology (210 citations). Published in Nature Genetics.

In The Last Decade

doi.org/10.1038/7716 →

Countries where authors are citing Comparative genomes of Chlamydia pneumoniae and C. trachomatis

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Comparative genomes of Chlamydia pneumoniae and C. trachomatis. 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 Comparative genomes of Chlamydia pneumoniae and C. trachomatis with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Comparative genomes of Chlamydia pneumoniae and C. trachomatis more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Comparative genomes of Chlamydia pneumoniae and C. trachomatis

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Comparative genomes of Chlamydia pneumoniae and C. trachomatis. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Comparative genomes of Chlamydia pneumoniae and C. trachomatis.

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/10.1038/7716.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026