Studies in myasthenia gravis: review of a twenty-year experience in over 1200 patients.
- Authors
- Osserman KeGabriel Genkins
- Journal
- PubMed
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w66497185 →Countries where authors are citing Studies in myasthenia gravis: review of a twenty-year experience in over 1200 patients.
This map shows the geographic impact of Studies in myasthenia gravis: review of a twenty-year experience in over 1200 patients.. 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 Studies in myasthenia gravis: review of a twenty-year experience in over 1200 patients. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Studies in myasthenia gravis: review of a twenty-year experience in over 1200 patients. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Studies in myasthenia gravis: review of a twenty-year experience in over 1200 patients.
This network shows the impact of Studies in myasthenia gravis: review of a twenty-year experience in over 1200 patients.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Studies in myasthenia gravis: review of a twenty-year experience in over 1200 patients..
About Studies in myasthenia gravis: review of a twenty-year experience in over 1200 patients.
This paper, published in 1972, received 508 indexed citations . Written by Osserman Ke and Gabriel Genkins covering the research area of Neurology and Oncology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Neurology (486 citations), Surgery (130 citations) and Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism (77 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/w66497185.