Mark J. Field

53 papers receiving 3.5k citations

Peers

Mark J. Field
Comparison fields: 5 of 122
  • Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience 1.3k
  • Physiology 1.7k
  • Behavioral Neuroscience 150
  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine 210
  • Pharmacology 454
Replace Tatsuo Yamamoto with:
Tatsuo Yamamoto Japan
Jeffry L. Vaught United States
Florence Noble France
Halina Machelska Germany
S. Spector United States
Patrizia Romualdi Italy
Raymond Mark Quock United States
Heinz Bönisch Germany
Mei‐Chuan Ko United States
Dominika Łabuz Germany
Mark J. Field relative to Tatsuo Yamamoto Japan Tatsuo Yamamoto's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2×3×
Tatsuo Yamamoto · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Mark J. Field

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Mark J. Field

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Mark J. Field. 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 Mark J. Field. The network helps show where Mark J. Field may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Mark J. Field, 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 Mark J. Field Line = papers co-authored together Mark J. Field links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 54 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2006492
2 1997300
3 1999267
4 1997224
5 1996208
6 2004199
7 1991195
8 2005187
9 1999181
10 1991128
11 2000102
12 200194
13 198780
14 199877
15 200173
16 198967
17 200762
18 200056
19 199751
20 200743

About Mark J. Field

Mark J. Field is a scholar working on Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Physiology, Pharmacology, Molecular Biology and Cognitive Neuroscience, having authored 54 papers that have together received 3.8k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Pain Mechanisms and Treatments (30 papers), Neuropeptides and Animal Physiology (16 papers), Receptor Mechanisms and Signaling (11 papers), Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research (11 papers), Ion channel regulation and function (6 papers), Botulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders (4 papers), Pharmacological Receptor Mechanisms and Effects (4 papers) and Memory and Neural Mechanisms (4 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience (1.3k citations), Physiology (1.7k citations), Behavioral Neuroscience (150 citations), Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine (210 citations) and Pharmacology (454 citations). Mark J. Field has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and Netherlands. Frequent co-authors include Lakhbir Singh, John M. Hughes, Scott McCleary, Ryszard J. Oles, Laithangbam Nepolean Singh, Steve Bramwell, Joel W. Hughes, Siân Lewis, G.N. Woodruff and Nadia M.J. Rupniak. Their work appears in journals such as British Journal of Pharmacology, Bioorganic & Medicinal Chemistry Letters, Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics, European Journal of Pharmacology and Journal of Medicinal Chemistry.

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