This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Bladder Cancer. 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 papers published in Bladder Cancer with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Bladder Cancer more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Bladder Cancer. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Bladder Cancer.
About Bladder Cancer
The 313 papers published in Bladder Cancer in the last decades have received a total of 3.4k indexed citations . Papers published in Bladder Cancer usually cover Urology (70 papers), Surgery (287 papers), Oncology (86 papers), Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine (50 papers) and Cancer Research (18 papers) specifically the topics of Bladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments (275 papers), Urinary and Genital Oncology Studies (178 papers), Urological Disorders and Treatments (52 papers), Epigenetics and DNA Methylation (35 papers), Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers (27 papers), Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research (21 papers), Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection (21 papers) and Esophageal Cancer Research and Treatment (20 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Bladder Cancer are Edward M. Messing, Michael A. O’Donnell, Mark Schoenberg, Seth P. Lerner, Georgios Gakis, Omar Fahmy, Ryan L. Steinberg, Lewis J. Thomas, Jonathan I. Izawa and Nicholas Power.
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.