Current Opinion in Pharmacology

2.3k papers and 113.7k indexed citations i.

About

The 2.3k papers published in Current Opinion in Pharmacology in the last decades have received a total of 113.7k indexed citations. Papers published in Current Opinion in Pharmacology usually cover Molecular Biology (986 papers), Physiology (401 papers) and Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience (318 papers) specifically the topics of Receptor Mechanisms and Signaling (166 papers), Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research (143 papers) and Asthma and respiratory diseases (129 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Current Opinion in Pharmacology are Graeme J. Sills, Kent Berridge, Terry E. Robinson, J. Wayne Aldridge, Pierre Paoletti, Eero Ċastrén, Shile Huang, Peter W. Kalivas, Richard H. Baltz and Philip I. Murray.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Current Opinion in Pharmacology

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Countries where authors publish in Current Opinion in Pharmacology

Since Specialization
Citations

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