Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 1950, received 599 indexed citations. Written by Evelyne Vanneste, Thierry Voet, Cédric Le Caignec, Michèle Ampe, Peter Könings, Cindy Melotte, Sophie Debrock, Mustapha Amyere, Miikka Vikkula and Frans Schuit covering the research area of Genetics, Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health and Cancer Research. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health (327 citations), Molecular Biology (265 citations) and Genetics (263 citations). Published in Nature Medicine.

In The Last Decade

doi.org/10.1038/nm.1924 →

Countries where authors are citing Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos. 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 Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos.

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/nm.1924.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026