Malignant fibrous histiocytoma. A clinicopathologic study of 130 cases.
Impact in
- Oncology 201
Classified as
- Journal
- PubMed
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w54771421 →Countries where authors are citing Malignant fibrous histiocytoma. A clinicopathologic study of 130 cases.
This map shows the geographic impact of Malignant fibrous histiocytoma. A clinicopathologic study of 130 cases.. 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 Malignant fibrous histiocytoma. A clinicopathologic study of 130 cases. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Malignant fibrous histiocytoma. A clinicopathologic study of 130 cases. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Malignant fibrous histiocytoma. A clinicopathologic study of 130 cases.
This network shows the impact of Malignant fibrous histiocytoma. A clinicopathologic study of 130 cases.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Malignant fibrous histiocytoma. A clinicopathologic study of 130 cases..
About Malignant fibrous histiocytoma. A clinicopathologic study of 130 cases.
This paper, published in 1980, received 404 indexed citations . Written by Munetomo Enjoji, Hiroshi Hashimoto, Masazumi Tsuneyoshi and Hiroshi Iwasaki covering the research area of Oncology, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine and Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine (371 citations), Oncology (201 citations), Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine (147 citations), Rheumatology (135 citations) and Physiology (47 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/w54771421.