Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and associations with cancer risk.
Impact in
- Cancer Research 364
Classified as
- Journal
- PubMed
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w23850062 →Countries where authors are citing Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and associations with cancer risk.
This map shows the geographic impact of Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and associations with cancer risk.. 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 Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and associations with cancer risk. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and associations with cancer risk. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and associations with cancer risk.
This network shows the impact of Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and associations with cancer risk.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and associations with cancer risk..
About Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes and associations with cancer risk.
This paper, published in 2002, received 1.0k indexed citations . Written by Ellen L. Goode, Cornelia M. Ulrich and John D. Potter covering the research area of Molecular Biology, Pathology and Forensic Medicine and Oncology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Molecular Biology (854 citations), Cancer Research (364 citations), Oncology (223 citations), Pathology and Forensic Medicine (222 citations) and Genetics (153 citations). Published in PubMed.
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/w23850062.