Countries where authors publish in Blood Purification
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Blood Purification. 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 Blood Purification with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Blood Purification more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Blood Purification. 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 Blood Purification.
About Blood Purification
The 2.6k papers published in Blood Purification in the last decades have received a total of 45.9k indexed citations . Papers published in Blood Purification usually cover Nephrology (1.3k papers), Emergency Medical Services (253 papers), Hematology (170 papers), Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine (60 papers) and Transplantation (29 papers) specifically the topics of Dialysis and Renal Disease Management (947 papers), Acute Kidney Injury Research (368 papers), Central Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis (247 papers), Muscle and Compartmental Disorders (140 papers), Erythropoietin and Anemia Treatment (113 papers), Parathyroid Disorders and Treatments (106 papers), Electrolyte and hormonal disorders (87 papers) and Renal function and acid-base balance (78 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Blood Purification are Claudio Ronco, Qi Qian, Zhen Cheng, Xiaoqiang Ding, Silvia De Rosa, Gianluca Villa, Sara Samoni, Peter Stenvinkel, Rinaldo Bellomo and Oleh M. Akchurin.
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.