Sacral fractures: an important problem. Retrospective analysis of 236 cases.
- Journal
- PubMed
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w83069147 →Countries where authors are citing Sacral fractures: an important problem. Retrospective analysis of 236 cases.
This map shows the geographic impact of Sacral fractures: an important problem. Retrospective analysis of 236 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 Sacral fractures: an important problem. Retrospective analysis of 236 cases. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Sacral fractures: an important problem. Retrospective analysis of 236 cases. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Sacral fractures: an important problem. Retrospective analysis of 236 cases.
This network shows the impact of Sacral fractures: an important problem. Retrospective analysis of 236 cases.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Sacral fractures: an important problem. Retrospective analysis of 236 cases..
About Sacral fractures: an important problem. Retrospective analysis of 236 cases.
This paper, published in 1988, received 559 indexed citations . Written by Francis Denis, Stephanie D. Davis and Thomas Comfort covering the research area of Surgery and Urology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Surgery (555 citations), Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (349 citations) and Urology (174 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/w83069147.