Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore.
- Journal
- PubMed
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w86080162 →Countries where authors are citing Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore.
This map shows the geographic impact of Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore.. 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 Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore.
This network shows the impact of Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore..
About Prevalence and risk factors for refractive errors in adult Chinese in Singapore.
This paper, published in 2000, received 605 indexed citations . Written by Tien Yin Wong, Paul J. Foster, Tze Pin Ng, James M. Tielsch, Sek‐Jin Chew, G J Johnson and S.K.W. Seah covering the research area of Epidemiology and Ophthalmology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Ophthalmology (496 citations), Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging (441 citations) and Epidemiology (415 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/w86080162.