Current Drug Abuse Reviews

206 papers and 8.5k indexed citations i.

About

The 206 papers published in Current Drug Abuse Reviews in the last decades have received a total of 8.5k indexed citations. Papers published in Current Drug Abuse Reviews usually cover Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience (49 papers), Clinical Psychology (42 papers) and Pharmacology (41 papers) specifically the topics of Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior (38 papers), Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes (32 papers) and Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research (27 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Current Drug Abuse Reviews are Dieter Henkel, M. Foster Olive, Nadia Solowij, Robert Battisti, Ashley N. Gearhardt, José Javier Miguel-Hidalgo, Albert Garcia‐Romeu, Matthew W. Johnson, Roland R. Griffiths and Joris C. Verster.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Current Drug Abuse Reviews

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Current Drug Abuse Reviews. 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 Current Drug Abuse Reviews.

Countries where authors publish in Current Drug Abuse Reviews

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Current Drug Abuse Reviews. 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 Current Drug Abuse Reviews with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Current Drug Abuse Reviews 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