Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy

3.2k papers and 78.0k indexed citations i.

About

The 3.2k papers published in Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy in the last decades have received a total of 78.0k indexed citations. Papers published in Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy usually cover Molecular Biology (1.1k papers), Immunology (897 papers) and Oncology (784 papers) specifically the topics of Immunotherapy and Immune Responses (353 papers), Virus-based gene therapy research (351 papers) and CAR-T cell therapy research (320 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy are Chaomei Chen, Glenn F. King, Dwaine F. Emerich, Hinrich Abken, Markus Chmielewski, Shengbo Liu, Zhigang Hu, Hung Tseng, Paul Workman and Alison Maloney.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy. 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 Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy.

Countries where authors publish in Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy. 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 Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy 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