Countries where authors publish in Shoulder & Elbow
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Shoulder & Elbow. 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 Shoulder & Elbow with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Shoulder & Elbow more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Shoulder & Elbow. 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 Shoulder & Elbow.
About Shoulder & Elbow
The 914 papers published in Shoulder & Elbow in the last decades have received a total of 6.8k indexed citations . Papers published in Shoulder & Elbow usually cover Rehabilitation (179 papers), Surgery (865 papers), Epidemiology (559 papers), Orthopedics and Sports Medicine (86 papers) and Internal Medicine (17 papers) specifically the topics of Shoulder Injury and Treatment (764 papers), Shoulder and Clavicle Injuries (531 papers), Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation (250 papers), Nerve Injury and Rehabilitation (200 papers), Elbow and Forearm Trauma Treatment (174 papers), Trauma Management and Diagnosis (77 papers), Sports injuries and prevention (62 papers) and Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation (56 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Shoulder & Elbow are Chris Littlewood, Adam C. Watts, Ara Nazarian, Edward K. Rodriguez, Stella Lee, Hai Le, Peter Dömös, Amar Rangan, Gilles Walch and Patrick H. Lam.
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.