Phytomedicine

7.3k papers and 205.9k indexed citations i.

About

The 7.3k papers published in Phytomedicine in the last decades have received a total of 205.9k indexed citations. Papers published in Phytomedicine usually cover Molecular Biology (3.5k papers), Pharmacology (1.4k papers) and Complementary and alternative medicine (1.3k papers) specifically the topics of Natural product bioactivities and synthesis (636 papers), Pharmacological Effects of Natural Compounds (630 papers) and Traditional Chinese Medicine Analysis (412 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Phytomedicine are Hildebert Wagner, Thomas Efferth, Michaël Wink, Mukesh Doble, G Ulrich‐Merzenich, Alexander Panossian, G. Wikman, Hossein Hosseinzadeh, N.R. Farnsworth and Robin J. Marles.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Phytomedicine

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Phytomedicine. 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 Phytomedicine.

Countries where authors publish in Phytomedicine

Since Specialization
Citations

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