Neurosurgical FOCUS

4.3k papers and 117.5k indexed citations i.

About

The 4.3k papers published in Neurosurgical FOCUS in the last decades have received a total of 117.5k indexed citations. Papers published in Neurosurgical FOCUS usually cover Surgery (1.8k papers), Neurology (1.6k papers) and Pathology and Forensic Medicine (970 papers) specifically the topics of Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology (727 papers), Spinal Fractures and Fixation Techniques (721 papers) and Meningioma and schwannoma management (614 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Neurosurgical FOCUS are William T. Couldwell, James K. Liu, Michael G. Fehlings, Michael Y. Wang, Paul A. Gardner, Amin Kassam, Carl H. Snyderman, Arlan Mintz, Iain H. Kalfas and Praveen V. Mummaneni.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Neurosurgical FOCUS

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Neurosurgical FOCUS. 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 Neurosurgical FOCUS.

Countries where authors publish in Neurosurgical FOCUS

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Neurosurgical FOCUS. 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 Neurosurgical FOCUS with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Neurosurgical FOCUS more than expected).

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
2025