Countries where authors publish in Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews. 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 Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews
This network shows the impact of papers published in Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews. 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 Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews.
About Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews
The 746 papers published in Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews in the last decades have received a total of 50.1k indexed citations . Papers published in Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews usually cover Biomaterials (212 papers), Urology (98 papers) and Genetics (137 papers) specifically the topics of Tissue Engineering and Regenerative Medicine (208 papers), Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications (171 papers) and 3D Printing in Biomedical Research (155 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Tissue Engineering Part B Reviews are Cleo Choong, Stephanie J. Bryant, John A. Jansen, Garret D. Nicodemus, David L. Kaplan, Antonios G. Mikos, Scott A. Guelcher, Tamer A. Ahmed, Rui L. Reis and Nicholas A. Kotov.
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.