Countries where authors publish in Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy. 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 Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy
This network shows the impact of papers published in Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy. 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 Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy.
About Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy
The 929 papers published in Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy in the last decades have received a total of 19.1k indexed citations . Papers published in Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy usually cover Epidemiology (566 papers), Applied Psychology (81 papers) and Toxicology (48 papers) specifically the topics of Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes (443 papers), Opioid Use Disorder Treatment (245 papers) and HIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk (192 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Substance Abuse Treatment Prevention and Policy are Andrea Petróczi, Jennifer Humensky, Jürgen Rehm, Thomas Kerr, Stephan Arndt, Bronwyn Myers, Eugene Aidman, Hannu Alho, Sameer Imtiaz and Evan Wood.
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.