Countries where authors publish in Food Engineering Reviews
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Food Engineering 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 Food Engineering Reviews with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Food Engineering Reviews more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Food Engineering Reviews
This network shows the impact of papers published in Food Engineering 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 Food Engineering Reviews.
About Food Engineering Reviews
The 414 papers published in Food Engineering Reviews in the last decades have received a total of 19.6k indexed citations . Papers published in Food Engineering Reviews usually cover Biotechnology (117 papers), Food Science (203 papers) and Physiology (26 papers) specifically the topics of Microbial Inactivation Methods (104 papers), Microencapsulation and Drying Processes (77 papers), Food Drying and Modeling (56 papers), Meat and Animal Product Quality (56 papers), Listeria monocytogenes in Food Safety (42 papers), Advanced Chemical Sensor Technologies (40 papers), Proteins in Food Systems (38 papers) and Spectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses (38 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Food Engineering Reviews are Eugène Vorobiev, Brijesh K. Tiwari, Marco Campus, Gintautas Saulis, Micha Peleg, Shyam S. Sablani, S. Mangaraj, J.A. Moses, Gustavo V. Barbosa‐Cánovas and Da‐Wen Sun.
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.