This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Tuberculosis. 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 Tuberculosis with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Tuberculosis more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Tuberculosis. 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 Tuberculosis.
About Tuberculosis
The 2.3k papers published in Tuberculosis in the last decades have received a total of 57.0k indexed citations . Papers published in Tuberculosis usually cover Infectious Diseases (1.8k papers), Archeology (50 papers), Chemical Health and Safety (1 paper), Pharmacology (16 papers) and Epidemiology (58 papers) specifically the topics of Tuberculosis Research and Epidemiology (1.8k papers), Mycobacterium research and diagnosis (58 papers), Paleopathology and ancient diseases (50 papers), Infectious Diseases and Tuberculosis (47 papers), Diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis (24 papers), Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology (12 papers), Pleural and Pulmonary Diseases (11 papers) and Inhalation and Respiratory Drug Delivery (10 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Tuberculosis are Patrick Joseph Brennan, Ian M. Orme, Robert Lee Hunter, Peter Roderick Donald, R. de la Rúa-Domènech, Colin Ratledge, Marcos Espinal, JoAnne L. Flynn, Gopal Krishan Khuller and Rajesh Pandey.
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.