Current Opinion in Urology

2.7k papers and 34.3k indexed citations i.

About

The 2.7k papers published in Current Opinion in Urology in the last decades have received a total of 34.3k indexed citations. Papers published in Current Opinion in Urology usually cover Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine (1.3k papers), Surgery (1.0k papers) and Urology (894 papers) specifically the topics of Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment (612 papers), Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research (531 papers) and Bladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments (496 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Current Opinion in Urology are Allison M. Okamura, Christopher R. Chapple, Andrea Tubaro, Neil Oakley, Michael W. Kattan, Laurence Klotz, Shahrokh F. Shariat, Inderbir S. Gill, Jean de la Rosette and John P. Mulhall.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Current Opinion in Urology

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Current Opinion in Urology. 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 Current Opinion in Urology.

Countries where authors publish in Current Opinion in Urology

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Current Opinion in Urology. 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 Current Opinion in Urology with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Current Opinion in Urology more than expected).

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.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025