European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.2772/13196 →Countries where authors are citing European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis
This map shows the geographic impact of European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. 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 European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis more than expected).
Fields of papers citing European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis
This network shows the impact of European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis.
About European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis
This paper, published in 2013, received 611 indexed citations . Written by Isabel Amendoeira, Nick Perry, M. Broeders, Chris de Wolf, R. Holland and Lawrence von Karsa covering the research area of Cancer Research, Oncology and Pathology and Forensic Medicine. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Oncology (327 citations), Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine (263 citations) and Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging (181 citations).
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/10.2772/13196.