Flow cytometry in clinical cancer research.
- Journal
- PubMed
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w42011145 →Countries where authors are citing Flow cytometry in clinical cancer research.
This map shows the geographic impact of Flow cytometry in clinical cancer research.. 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 Flow cytometry in clinical cancer research. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Flow cytometry in clinical cancer research. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Flow cytometry in clinical cancer research.
This network shows the impact of Flow cytometry in clinical cancer research.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Flow cytometry in clinical cancer research..
About Flow cytometry in clinical cancer research.
This paper, published in 1983, received 659 indexed citations . Written by Barthel Barlogie, Martin N. Raber, Johannes Schumann, Tod S. Johnson, Benjamin Drewinko, Douglas E. Swartzendruber, W. Göhde, Michael Andreeff and Emil J. Freireich covering the research area of Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Cancer Research and Hematology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Cancer Research (273 citations), Oncology (216 citations) and Molecular Biology (185 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/w42011145.