University of Missouri–St. Louis

551.8k citations
16.5k papers ·

Impact in

Papers in

University of Missouri–St. Louis

14.7k papers receiving 509.6k citations

Peers

University of Missouri–St. Louis
Comparison fields: 5 of 250
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation 29.9k
  • Ecological Modeling 9.9k
  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics 39.9k
  • Clinical Psychology 38.6k
  • Health 12.5k
Replace Southern Illinois University Carbondale with:
Southern Illinois University Carbondale United States
University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee United States
Miami University United States
University of Arkansas at Fayetteville United States
University of Notre Dame United States
University of Illinois System United States
Saint Louis University United States
University of Wisconsin System United States
University of Missouri United States
Kansas State University United States
University of Missouri–St. Louis relative to Southern Illinois University Carbondale United States Southern Illinois University Carbondale's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.1×
Southern Illinois University Carbondale · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at University of Missouri–St. Louis

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers published by authors at University of Missouri–St. Louis

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with University of Missouri–St. Louis 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 of Missouri–St. Louis at the time of their publication.

About University of Missouri–St. Louis

In recent decades, authors affiliated with University of Missouri–St. Louis have published 16.5k papers, which have received a total of 551.8k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 1.1k papers in Clinical Psychology, 360 papers in Health, 964 papers in Social Psychology, 859 papers in Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics and 508 papers in Nature and Landscape Conservation on the topics of Crime Patterns and Interventions (484 papers), Plant and animal studies (470 papers), Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies (324 papers), Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis (271 papers), Homelessness and Social Issues (249 papers), Animal Behavior and Reproduction (228 papers), Child Abuse and Trauma (227 papers) and Avian ecology and behavior (216 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Nature and Landscape Conservation (29.9k citations), Ecological Modeling (9.9k citations), Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics (39.9k citations), Clinical Psychology (38.6k citations) and Health (12.5k citations). Authors at University of Missouri–St. Louis collaborate with scholars in United States, China and United Kingdom and have published in prestigious journals including The American Journal of Surgery, Journal of Biological Chemistry, The American Journal of Medicine, Journal of Organometallic Chemistry and Organometallics. Some of University of Missouri–St. Louis's most productive authors include Robert E. Ricklefs, Frank Moss, Elizabeth A. Kellogg, Patricia A. Resick, James A. Breaugh, James F. Campbell, Nigam P. Rath, Robert J. Marquis, Alexei V. Demchenko and Xuemin Wang.

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