Countries where authors publish in Brain stimulation
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Brain stimulation. 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 published in Brain stimulation with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Brain stimulation more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Brain stimulation. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Brain stimulation.
About Brain stimulation
The 3.4k papers published in Brain stimulation in the last decades have received a total of 88.0k indexed citations . Papers published in Brain stimulation usually cover Neurology (1.8k papers), Cognitive Neuroscience (990 papers), Neurology (527 papers), Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine (122 papers) and Psychiatry and Mental health (256 papers) specifically the topics of Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies (1.6k papers), Neurological disorders and treatments (482 papers), EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces (418 papers), Functional Brain Connectivity Studies (353 papers), Neuroscience and Neural Engineering (244 papers), Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies (184 papers), Vagus Nerve Stimulation Research (180 papers) and Muscle activation and electromyography studies (157 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Brain stimulation are Michael A. Nitsche, Walter Paulus, Marom Bikson, Álvaro Pascual‐Leone, Paul B. Fitzgerald, John C. Rothwell, Ulf Ziemann, Felipe Fregni, Mark S. George and Zafiris J. Daskalakis.
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.