Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine

252.5k citations
12.0k papers · indexed · active since 1950
    • Acupuncture Treatment Research Studies 1255
    • Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies 868
    • Traditional Chinese Medicine Studies 709
    • Traditional Chinese Medicine Analysis 596
  • Pharmacology top 0.5%
    • Pharmacological Effects of Natural Compounds 1054
    • Healthcare and Venom Research 528
    • Pharmacological Effects of Natural Compounds 1054
    • Healthcare and Venom Research 528
    • Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity 589
    • Natural product bioactivities and synthesis 587

Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine

11.8k papers receiving 243.0k citations

Peers

Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Comparison fields: 5 of 240
  • Complementary and alternative medicine 60.7k
  • Pharmacology 33.9k
  • Biochemistry 16.3k
  • Pharmacology 35.4k
  • Food Science 28.3k
Replace Phytomedicine with:
Phytomedicine China
Phytotherapy Research China
Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy China
BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine China
Planta Medica Germany
Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis China
Frontiers in Pharmacology China
Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin Japan
Fitoterapia China
Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology United Kingdom
Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine relative to Phytomedicine China Phytomedicine's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×
Phytomedicine · 1×
Citations per year

Countries where authors publish in Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 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 Complementary and Alternative Medicine 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 Complementary and Alternative Medicine more than expected).

Fields of papers published in Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 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 Complementary and Alternative Medicine.

About Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine

The 12.0k papers published in Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine in the last decades have received a total of 252.5k indexed citations . Papers published in Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine usually cover Complementary and alternative medicine (3.5k papers), Pharmacology (2.0k papers) and Pharmacology (1.8k papers) specifically the topics of Acupuncture Treatment Research Studies (1.3k papers), Pharmacological Effects of Natural Compounds (1.1k papers), Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies (868 papers), Traditional Chinese Medicine Studies (709 papers), Traditional Chinese Medicine Analysis (596 papers), Essential Oils and Antimicrobial Activity (589 papers), Natural product bioactivities and synthesis (587 papers) and Healthcare and Venom Research (528 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine are Edwin L. Cooper, Mohammad A. Alzohairy, Vassya Bankova, Enzo A. Palombo, Jie Wang, Mohamad Fawzi Mahomoodally, Fabio Firenzuoli, Gerhard Litscher, Siew Hua Gan and Luigi Gori.

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
2026