Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices
Impact in
- Pharmacology top 10%
- Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
- Psychiatry and Mental health top 10%
- Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Papers in
-
- Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials 81
- Toxicology 29
- Top scholars
- Karl BroichJulia StinglJoachim RöhmelHarald Juergen HampelPeter KasperLutz MüllerMartina WeiseR. Horré
- Journals
- Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis (29 papers)Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (23 papers)PLoS ONE (18 papers)Statistics in Medicine (17 papers)Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology (16 papers)
- Partner nations
- GermanyNetherlandsUnited States
In The Last Decade
Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices
950 papers receiving 29.3k citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 219
- Pharmacology 2.3k
- Psychiatry and Mental health 3.4k
- Cancer Research 3.0k
- Biological Psychiatry 447
- Geriatrics and Gerontology 531
Countries citing scholars working at Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices
This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices. 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 produced at Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices more than expected).
Fields of papers published by authors at Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices
This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices at the time of their publication. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers affiliated with Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices at the time of their publication.
About Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices
In recent decades, authors affiliated with Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices have published 1.1k papers, which have received a total of 33.2k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 83 papers in Statistics and Probability, 29 papers in Toxicology, 111 papers in Cancer Research, 65 papers in Pharmacology and 111 papers in Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health on the topics of Pharmaceutical studies and practices (90 papers), Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (89 papers), Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment (85 papers), Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials (81 papers), Biosimilars and Bioanalytical Methods (57 papers), Pharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism (48 papers), Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy (46 papers) and Medical and Health Sciences Research (37 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Pharmacology (2.3k citations), Psychiatry and Mental health (3.4k citations), Cancer Research (3.0k citations), Biological Psychiatry (447 citations) and Geriatrics and Gerontology (531 citations). Authors at Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices collaborate with scholars in Germany, Netherlands and United States and have published in prestigious journals including Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis, Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, PLoS ONE, Statistics in Medicine and Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. Some of Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices's most productive authors include Karl Broich, Julia Stingl, Joachim Röhmel, Harald Juergen Hampel, Peter Kasper, Lutz Müller, Martina Weise, R. Horré, R. Siekmeier and Sybren G. de Hoog.
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.