International Life Sciences Institute
Impact in
- Chemical Health and Safety top 2%
-
- Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Papers in
-
- Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment 65
- Top scholars
- Denise E. RobinsonArtemis P. SimopoulosMichael P. HolsappleHarold Willis KohlKarluss ThomasStephen S. OlinRonald P. BrownJames H. Kim
- Journals
- Toxicological Sciences (23 papers)Food and Chemical Toxicology (17 papers)Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology (16 papers)Critical Reviews in Toxicology (13 papers)Journal of Nutrition (10 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesUnited KingdomCanada
In The Last Decade
International Life Sciences Institute
351 papers receiving 21.9k citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 209
- Chemical Health and Safety 165
- Cancer Research 2.5k
- Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis 2.5k
- Small Animals 1.5k
- Pharmacology 1.2k
Countries citing scholars working at International Life Sciences Institute
This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at International Life Sciences Institute. 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 International Life Sciences Institute with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites International Life Sciences Institute more than expected).
Fields of papers published by authors at International Life Sciences Institute
This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with International Life Sciences Institute 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 International Life Sciences Institute at the time of their publication.
About International Life Sciences Institute
In recent decades, authors affiliated with International Life Sciences Institute have published 360 papers, which have received a total of 21.9k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 5 papers in Chemical Health and Safety, 66 papers in Cancer Research, 71 papers in Food Science, 31 papers in Small Animals and 29 papers in Nutrition and Dietetics on the topics of Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment (65 papers), Agricultural safety and regulations (31 papers), Animal testing and alternatives (30 papers), Genetically Modified Organisms Research (25 papers), Nutrition, Health, and Society Studies (22 papers), Immunotoxicology and immune responses (21 papers), Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology (17 papers) and Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling (14 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Chemical Health and Safety (165 citations), Cancer Research (2.5k citations), Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis (2.5k citations), Small Animals (1.5k citations) and Pharmacology (1.2k citations). Authors at International Life Sciences Institute collaborate with scholars in United States, United Kingdom and Canada and have published in prestigious journals including Toxicological Sciences, Food and Chemical Toxicology, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, Critical Reviews in Toxicology and Journal of Nutrition. Some of International Life Sciences Institute's most productive authors include Denise E. Robinson, Artemis P. Simopoulos, Michael P. Holsapple, Harold Willis Kohl, Karluss Thomas, Stephen S. Olin, Ronald P. Brown, James H. Kim, Lorenz R. Rhomberg and Stan L. Lindstedt.
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.