Procter & Gamble (United States)

6.4k papers receiving 277.1k citations

Peers

Procter & Gamble (United States)
Comparison fields: 5 of 248
  • Dermatology 22.0k
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine 20.0k
  • Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis 24.6k
  • Pharmaceutical Science 9.3k
  • Periodontics 6.2k
Replace University of Cincinnati Medical Center with:
University of Cincinnati Medical Center United States
University of Tennessee Health Science Center United States
Medical University of South Carolina United States
Michigan Medicine United States
United States Food and Drug Administration United States
Augusta University United States
United States Public Health Service United States
Zero to Three United States
Pfizer (United States) United States
Thomas Jefferson University United States
Procter & Gamble (United States) relative to University of Cincinnati Medical Center United States University of Cincinnati Medical Center's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.4×
University of Cincinnati Medical Center · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at Procter & Gamble (United States)

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers published by authors at Procter & Gamble (United States)

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Procter & Gamble (United States) 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 Procter & Gamble (United States) at the time of their publication.

About Procter & Gamble (United States)

In recent decades, authors affiliated with Procter & Gamble (United States) have published 7.0k papers, which have received a total of 304.4k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 583 papers in Dermatology, 252 papers in Periodontics, 33 papers in Chemical Health and Safety, 629 papers in Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis and 328 papers in Small Animals on the topics of Contact Dermatitis and Allergies (315 papers), Analytical Chemistry and Chromatography (296 papers), Animal testing and alternatives (283 papers), Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment (272 papers), Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals (245 papers), Bone health and treatments (222 papers), Environmental Chemistry and Analysis (220 papers) and Surfactants and Colloidal Systems (213 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Dermatology (22.0k citations), Orthopedics and Sports Medicine (20.0k citations), Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis (24.6k citations), Pharmaceutical Science (9.3k citations) and Periodontics (6.2k citations). Authors at Procter & Gamble (United States) collaborate with scholars in United States, United Kingdom and India and have published in prestigious journals including Journal of the American Oil Chemists Society, Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, Food and Chemical Toxicology and Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology. Some of Procter & Gamble (United States)'s most productive authors include Isao Noda, John C. Peters, Miranda A. Farage, G. Frank Gerberick, Kevin E. Driscoll, James O. Hill, F.H. Mattson, Matthew L Barker, William S. Rayens and David P. Siegel.

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