Clinical Rehabilitation

3.4k papers and 116.3k indexed citations i.

About

The 3.4k papers published in Clinical Rehabilitation in the last decades have received a total of 116.3k indexed citations. Papers published in Clinical Rehabilitation usually cover Rehabilitation (1.2k papers), Psychiatry and Mental health (1.2k papers) and Epidemiology (555 papers) specifically the topics of Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery (1.2k papers), Cerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders (857 papers) and Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation (516 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Clinical Rehabilitation are Derick T Wade, Lynne Turner‐Stokes, Sarah Tyson, NB Lincoln, Richard W. Bohannon, Anand Pandyan, María Stokes, G. Rankin, Louise Connell and Peter W. Halligan.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Clinical Rehabilitation

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Clinical Rehabilitation. 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 Clinical Rehabilitation.

Countries where authors publish in Clinical Rehabilitation

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Clinical Rehabilitation. 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 Clinical Rehabilitation with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Clinical Rehabilitation more than expected).

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 journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025