National surveillance for asthma--United States, 1980-2004.
Impact in
- Physiology 640
Classified as
- Journal
- PubMed
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w84884823 →Countries where authors are citing National surveillance for asthma--United States, 1980-2004.
This map shows the geographic impact of National surveillance for asthma--United States, 1980-2004.. 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 National surveillance for asthma--United States, 1980-2004. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites National surveillance for asthma--United States, 1980-2004. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing National surveillance for asthma--United States, 1980-2004.
This network shows the impact of National surveillance for asthma--United States, 1980-2004.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the National surveillance for asthma--United States, 1980-2004..
About National surveillance for asthma--United States, 1980-2004.
This paper, published in 2007, received 966 indexed citations . Written by Jeanne E. Moorman, Rose A. Rudd, Carol Johnson, Michael King, Patrick Minor, Cathy Bailey and Lara J. Akinbami covering the research area of Sociology and Political Science, Economics and Econometrics and Emergency Medicine. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Physiology (640 citations), Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine (385 citations), General Health Professions (150 citations), Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis (129 citations) and Speech and Hearing (127 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/w84884823.