Countries where authors publish in Medical dosimetry
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Medical dosimetry. 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 Medical dosimetry with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Medical dosimetry more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Medical dosimetry. 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 Medical dosimetry.
About Medical dosimetry
The 1.7k papers published in Medical dosimetry in the last decades have received a total of 16.4k indexed citations . Papers published in Medical dosimetry usually cover Radiation (1.4k papers), Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging (791 papers) and Otorhinolaryngology (141 papers) specifically the topics of Advanced Radiotherapy Techniques (1.4k papers), Radiation Therapy and Dosimetry (535 papers), Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications (407 papers), Radiation Dose and Imaging (257 papers), Breast Cancer Treatment Studies (174 papers), Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment (164 papers), Head and Neck Cancer Studies (140 papers) and Advanced X-ray and CT Imaging (139 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Medical dosimetry are Steve Jiang, Cheng B. Saw, Dennis D. Leavitt, Thomas Byrne, Radhe Mohan, Uwe Oelfke, B. Sánchez‐Nieto, Komanduri M. Ayyangar, Wolfgang A. Tomé and Paul Keall.
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.