Defence Science and Technology Laboratory

2.9k papers receiving 81.9k citations

Peers

Defence Science and Technology Laboratory
Comparison fields: 5 of 243
  • Virology 1.3k
  • Endocrinology 1k
  • Ceramics and Composites 1.4k
  • Microbiology 1.3k
  • Toxicology 1k
Replace Unilever (United Kingdom) with:
Unilever (United Kingdom) United Kingdom
CEA Paris-Saclay - Etablissement de Fontenay-aux-roses France
Pfizer (United Kingdom) United Kingdom
Hôpital Pontchaillou France
Université Européenne de Bretagne France
Sanofi (France) France
Ministry of Defence United Kingdom
Merck KGaA, Darmstadt (Germany) Germany
Janssen (Belgium) Belgium
St Mark's Hospital United Kingdom
Defence Science and Technology Laboratory relative to Unilever (United Kingdom) United Kingdom Unilever (United Kingdom)'s profile →
Citations per field
00.5×5×10×13.8×
Unilever (United Kingdom) · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at Defence Science and Technology Laboratory

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers published by authors at Defence Science and Technology Laboratory

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Defence Science and Technology Laboratory 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 Defence Science and Technology Laboratory at the time of their publication.

About Defence Science and Technology Laboratory

In recent decades, authors affiliated with Defence Science and Technology Laboratory have published 3k papers, which have received a total of 82k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 48 papers in Toxicology, 70 papers in Emergency Medicine, 130 papers in Spectroscopy, 36 papers in Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine and 183 papers in Aerospace Engineering on the topics of Bacillus and Francisella bacterial research (191 papers), Pesticide Exposure and Toxicity (146 papers), Burkholderia infections and melioidosis (114 papers), Yersinia bacterium, plague, ectoparasites research (99 papers), High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior (67 papers), Military Strategy and Technology (66 papers), Mechanical Behavior of Composites (56 papers) and Cholinesterase and Neurodegenerative Diseases (55 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Virology (1.3k citations), Endocrinology (1k citations), Ceramics and Composites (1.4k citations), Microbiology (1.3k citations) and Toxicology (1k citations). Authors at Defence Science and Technology Laboratory collaborate with scholars in United Kingdom, United States and Australia and have published in prestigious journals including Vaccine, Infection and Immunity, PLoS ONE, Journal of Medical Microbiology and Chemical Communications. Some of Defence Science and Technology Laboratory's most productive authors include Richard W. Titball, Petra C. F. Oyston, Keith R. Stokes, Robin M. Black, Robert Wood, Frank Walsh, Robert W. Read, Julian A. Wharton, Ethel Diane Williamson and Paul T. Curtis.

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