Current Psychiatry Reviews

386 papers and 5.2k indexed citations i.

About

The 386 papers published in Current Psychiatry Reviews in the last decades have received a total of 5.2k indexed citations. Papers published in Current Psychiatry Reviews usually cover Clinical Psychology (132 papers), Psychiatry and Mental health (116 papers) and Cognitive Neuroscience (50 papers) specifically the topics of Schizophrenia research and treatment (38 papers), Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development (35 papers) and Mental Health and Psychiatry (29 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Current Psychiatry Reviews are Joël Billieux, Colin R. Martin, Daniel L. King, Daria J. Kuss, Mark D. Griffiths, Josep Dalmau, Alexander W. Winkler, Matthew S. Kayser, Tiffany F. Hughes and Mary Ganguli.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Current Psychiatry Reviews

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Current Psychiatry Reviews. 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 Psychiatry Reviews.

Countries where authors publish in Current Psychiatry Reviews

Since Specialization
Citations

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