Daniel Bergé

1.6k citations
68 papers · 964 · h-index 18

Impact in

Papers in

Daniel Bergé

60 papers receiving 943 citations

Peers

Daniel Bergé
Comparison fields: 5 of 64
  • Psychiatry and Mental health 456
  • Biological Psychiatry 44
  • Clinical Psychology 182
  • Cognitive Neuroscience 170
  • Philosophy 85
Replace Ana M. Sánchez-Torres with:
Ana M. Sánchez-Torres Spain
Igor Bombín Spain
Carissa Coulston Australia
Zeliha Tunca Türkiye
Richard Cosway United Kingdom
Rebecca Schennach Germany
Ching‐Jui Chang Taiwan
Karolina Leopold Germany
Dimitrios Kontis Greece
J.-M. Azorin France
Daniel Bergé relative to Ana M. Sánchez-Torres Spain Ana M. Sánchez-Torres's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×
Ana M. Sánchez-Torres · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Daniel Bergé

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Daniel Bergé

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Daniel Bergé. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Daniel Bergé. The network helps show where Daniel Bergé may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Daniel Bergé, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Daniel Bergé Line = papers co-authored together Daniel Bergé links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 68 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 201084
2 200879
3 201573
4 200960
5 201452
6 201847
7 201546
8 201832
9 202032
10 200629
11 201827
12 201727
13 200724
14 202120
15 201720
16 201517
17
Reasons and subjective effects of cannabis use among people with psychotic disorders: a systematic review.
201517
18 201317
19 201816
20 202015

About Daniel Bergé

Daniel Bergé is a scholar working on Psychiatry and Mental health, Clinical Psychology, Philosophy, Cognitive Neuroscience and Pharmacology, having authored 68 papers that have together received 964 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Schizophrenia research and treatment (40 papers), Mental Health and Psychiatry (11 papers), Bipolar Disorder and Treatment (8 papers), Functional Brain Connectivity Studies (7 papers), Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development (5 papers), Tryptophan and brain disorders (5 papers), Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments (4 papers) and Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research (4 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Psychiatry and Mental health (456 citations), Biological Psychiatry (44 citations), Clinical Psychology (182 citations), Cognitive Neuroscience (170 citations) and Philosophy (85 citations). Daniel Bergé has collaborated with scholars based in Spain, United States and United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include Antoni Bulbena, Víctor Pérez, Anna Mané, Óscar Vilarroya, P. Salgado, Susanna Carmona, Mariana Rovira, Miquel Bernardo, Emilio Fernández-Egea and Clemente García‐Rizo. Their work appears in journals such as European Neuropsychopharmacology, Psychiatry Research, Schizophrenia Research, European Psychiatry and Frontiers in Psychiatry.

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 authors with similar magnitude of impact