Current Opinion in Pediatrics

3.2k papers and 68.0k indexed citations i.

About

The 3.2k papers published in Current Opinion in Pediatrics in the last decades have received a total of 68.0k indexed citations. Papers published in Current Opinion in Pediatrics usually cover Surgery (672 papers), Epidemiology (600 papers) and Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine (549 papers) specifically the topics of Neonatal Respiratory Health Research (216 papers), Congenital Heart Disease Studies (126 papers) and Child and Adolescent Health (101 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Current Opinion in Pediatrics are Gale R. Burstein, Kimberly Workowski, David C. Bellinger, Alan H. Jobe, Andrea Baccarelli, Valentina Bollati, Daniel W. Green, Prasad Devarajan, Philip J. Landrigan and Emily R. Dodwell.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Current Opinion in Pediatrics

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Countries where authors publish in Current Opinion in Pediatrics

Since Specialization
Citations

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