This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Neurospine. 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 Neurospine with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Neurospine more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Neurospine. 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 Neurospine.
About Neurospine
The 726 papers published in Neurospine in the last decades have received a total of 7.6k indexed citations . Papers published in Neurospine usually cover Pathology and Forensic Medicine (498 papers), Surgery (601 papers), Health Informatics (9 papers), Pharmacology (82 papers) and Neurology (36 papers) specifically the topics of Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology (457 papers), Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques (391 papers), Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy (199 papers), Scoliosis diagnosis and treatment (131 papers), Pelvic and Acetabular Injuries (83 papers), Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation (80 papers), Medical Imaging and Analysis (64 papers) and Spinal Hematomas and Complications (52 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Neurospine are Mehmet Zileli, Atul Goel, Seung-Jae Hyun, Dong Hwa Heo, Hyeun Sung Kim, Samuel K. Cho, Jeong Yoon Park, Jun Jae Shin, Salman Sharif and Choon Keun Park.
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.