New insights into the activities and toxicities of the old anticancer drug doxorubicin
- Journal
- FEBS Journal
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1111/febs.15583 →Countries where authors are citing New insights into the activities and toxicities of the old anticancer drug doxorubicin
This map shows the geographic impact of New insights into the activities and toxicities of the old anticancer drug doxorubicin. 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 New insights into the activities and toxicities of the old anticancer drug doxorubicin with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites New insights into the activities and toxicities of the old anticancer drug doxorubicin more than expected).
Fields of papers citing New insights into the activities and toxicities of the old anticancer drug doxorubicin
This network shows the impact of New insights into the activities and toxicities of the old anticancer drug doxorubicin. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the New insights into the activities and toxicities of the old anticancer drug doxorubicin.
About New insights into the activities and toxicities of the old anticancer drug doxorubicin
This paper, published in 2020, received 266 indexed citations . Written by Sabina Y. van der Zanden, Xiaohang Qiao and Jacques Neefjes covering the research area of Molecular Biology, Oncology and Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Molecular Biology (107 citations), Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine (64 citations) and Oncology (63 citations). Published in FEBS Journal.
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/10.1111/febs.15583.