University College Cork

1.2M citations
38.4k papers ·

Impact in

Papers in

University College Cork

33.5k papers receiving 1.1M citations

Peers

University College Cork
Comparison fields: 5 of 252
  • Biological Psychiatry 25.1k
  • Food Science 173.2k
  • Nutrition and Dietetics 86.0k
  • Gastroenterology 26.8k
  • Animal Science and Zoology 45.7k
Replace University College Dublin with:
University College Dublin Ireland
University of Glasgow United Kingdom
Trinity College Dublin Ireland
Queen's University Belfast United Kingdom
Cardiff University United Kingdom
University of Reading United Kingdom
University of Aberdeen United Kingdom
King's College London United Kingdom
University of London United Kingdom
University of Ulster United Kingdom
University College Cork relative to University College Dublin Ireland University College Dublin's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×6.4×
University College Dublin · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at University College Cork

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers published by authors at University College Cork

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with University College Cork 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 University College Cork at the time of their publication.

About University College Cork

In recent decades, authors affiliated with University College Cork have published 38.4k papers, which have received a total of 1.2M indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 3.2k papers in Food Science, 263 papers in Biological Psychiatry, 1.5k papers in Nutrition and Dietetics, 281 papers in Geriatrics and Gerontology and 431 papers in Gastroenterology on the topics of Probiotics and Fermented Foods (1.6k papers), Gut microbiota and health (1.3k papers), Proteins in Food Systems (885 papers), Meat and Animal Product Quality (772 papers), Semiconductor materials and devices (684 papers), Protein Hydrolysis and Bioactive Peptides (625 papers), Photonic and Optical Devices (624 papers) and Microencapsulation and Drying Processes (519 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Biological Psychiatry (25.1k citations), Food Science (173.2k citations), Nutrition and Dietetics (86.0k citations), Gastroenterology (26.8k citations) and Animal Science and Zoology (45.7k citations). Authors at University College Cork collaborate with scholars in Ireland, United Kingdom and United States and have published in prestigious journals including PLoS ONE, International Dairy Journal, Applied and Environmental Microbiology, Scientific Reports and Proceedings of The Nutrition Society. Some of University College Cork's most productive authors include John F. Cryan, Timothy G. Dinan, Colin Hill, R. Paul Ross, Patrick F. Fox, Fergus Shanahan, Catherine Stanton, Paul D. Cotter, Paul L.H. McSweeney and Elke K. Arendt.

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