Current Opinion in Food Science

1.1k papers and 36.5k indexed citations i.

About

The 1.1k papers published in Current Opinion in Food Science in the last decades have received a total of 36.5k indexed citations. Papers published in Current Opinion in Food Science usually cover Food Science (494 papers), Molecular Biology (313 papers) and Nutrition and Dietetics (214 papers) specifically the topics of Proteins in Food Systems (119 papers), Meat and Animal Product Quality (111 papers) and Probiotics and Fermented Foods (100 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Current Opinion in Food Science are Michael G. Gänzle, Hua Zhang, Rong Tsao, David Julian McClements, Eunice C.Y. Li‐Chan, Délia B. Rodriguez–Amaya, Adriano G. Cruz, José M. Lorenzo, Palash Panja and Bengü Öztürk.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Current Opinion in Food Science

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Countries where authors publish in Current Opinion in Food Science

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Current Opinion in Food Science. 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 Food Science 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 Food Science 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