Countries where authors publish in Evidence-Based Dentistry
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Evidence-Based Dentistry. 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 Evidence-Based Dentistry with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Evidence-Based Dentistry more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Evidence-Based Dentistry
This network shows the impact of papers published in Evidence-Based Dentistry. 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 Evidence-Based Dentistry.
About Evidence-Based Dentistry
The 516 papers published in Evidence-Based Dentistry in the last decades have received a total of 3.1k indexed citations . Papers published in Evidence-Based Dentistry usually cover Periodontics (169 papers), General Dentistry (46 papers), Oral Surgery (153 papers), Orthodontics (92 papers) and Complementary and Manual Therapy (18 papers) specifically the topics of Dental Health and Care Utilization (105 papers), Oral microbiology and periodontitis research (79 papers), Dental Radiography and Imaging (65 papers), Dental Implant Techniques and Outcomes (51 papers), Dental materials and restorations (50 papers), Dental Research and COVID-19 (46 papers), Oral Health Pathology and Treatment (42 papers) and Dental Erosion and Treatment (37 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Evidence-Based Dentistry are Kate Levin, Derek Richards, C. A. Yeung, Elliot Abt, Chris Deery, Joseph LY Liu, Anne Maguire, Sergio Uribe, Kamran Ali and Helen V Worthington.
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.