Tobacco product use among adults--United States, 2012-2013.
Impact in
- Physiology 255
Classified as
- Journal
- PubMed
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w65350097 →Countries where authors are citing Tobacco product use among adults--United States, 2012-2013.
This map shows the geographic impact of Tobacco product use among adults--United States, 2012-2013.. 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 Tobacco product use among adults--United States, 2012-2013. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Tobacco product use among adults--United States, 2012-2013. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Tobacco product use among adults--United States, 2012-2013.
This network shows the impact of Tobacco product use among adults--United States, 2012-2013.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Tobacco product use among adults--United States, 2012-2013..
About Tobacco product use among adults--United States, 2012-2013.
This paper, published in 2014, received 331 indexed citations . Written by Israel T. Agaku, Brian A. King, Corinne G. Husten, Rebecca Bunnell, Bridget K. Ambrose, Sean Hu, Enver Holder-Hayes and Hannah Day covering the research area of Speech and Hearing, Physiology and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Physiology (255 citations), Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (30 citations), Social Psychology (20 citations), General Health Professions (16 citations) and Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis (14 citations). Published in PubMed.
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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w65350097.