Centro de Estudos da Voz

9.2k citations
554 papers ·

Impact in

Papers in

Centro de Estudos da Voz

465 papers receiving 8.5k citations

Peers

Centro de Estudos da Voz
Comparison fields: 5 of 210
  • Speech and Hearing 1.2k
  • Physiology 4.2k
  • Clinical Psychology 1.4k
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology 807
  • Toxicology 71
Replace Centro Universitário Metodista IPA with:
Centro Universitário Metodista IPA Brazil
Microsoft (Brazil) Brazil
Universidade Ibirapuera Brazil
Instituto de Ensino e Pesquisa Santa Casa Brazil
Centro Paulista de Investigação Clinica Brazil
Brazilian Academy of Sciences Brazil
Sociedade Brasileira de Cardiologia Brazil
Centro Universitário Lusíada Brazil
Centro Universitário Adventista de São Paulo Brazil
Sociedade Brasileira de Pediatria Brazil
Centro de Estudos da Voz relative to Centro Universitário Metodista IPA Brazil Centro Universitário Metodista IPA's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×5×11.4×
Centro Universitário Metodista IPA · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at Centro de Estudos da Voz

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at Centro de Estudos da Voz. 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 Centro de Estudos da Voz with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Centro de Estudos da Voz more than expected).

Fields of papers published by authors at Centro de Estudos da Voz

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Centro de Estudos da Voz 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 Centro de Estudos da Voz at the time of their publication.

About Centro de Estudos da Voz

In recent decades, authors affiliated with Centro de Estudos da Voz have published 554 papers, which have received a total of 9.2k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 69 papers in Speech and Hearing, 231 papers in Physiology, 72 papers in Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, 20 papers in Urban Studies and 62 papers in Clinical Psychology on the topics of Voice and Speech Disorders (228 papers), Phonetics and Phonology Research (70 papers), Dysphagia Assessment and Management (58 papers), Stuttering Research and Treatment (52 papers), Tracheal and airway disorders (14 papers), Social and Economic Solidarity (13 papers), Cleft Lip and Palate Research (12 papers) and Urban Development and Societal Issues (11 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Speech and Hearing (1.2k citations), Physiology (4.2k citations), Clinical Psychology (1.4k citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (807 citations) and Toxicology (71 citations). Authors at Centro de Estudos da Voz collaborate with scholars in Brazil, United States and Portugal and have published in prestigious journals including Journal of Voice, CoDAS, Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica, PLoS ONE and Logopedics Phoniatrics Vocology. Some of Centro de Estudos da Voz's most productive authors include Mara Behlau, Gisele Oliveira, Fabiana Zambon, Felipe Moreti, Paulo Pontes, Gisele Gasparini, Glaucya Madazio, J. C. Callaway, Glacus S. Brito and Rosiane Yamasaki.

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 institutions with similar magnitude of impact