Expert Opinion on Drug Safety

2.5k papers and 49.7k indexed citations i.

About

The 2.5k papers published in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety in the last decades have received a total of 49.7k indexed citations. Papers published in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety usually cover Oncology (349 papers), Surgery (336 papers) and Pharmacology (318 papers) specifically the topics of Pharmacovigilance and Adverse Drug Reactions (248 papers), Pharmaceutical studies and practices (151 papers) and Drug-Induced Adverse Reactions (123 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety are André Scheen, Emily Hajjar, Joseph T. Hanlon, Robert L. Maher, Noah Scheinfeld, Icilio Cavero, Karen Seiter, Mark A. Perazella, Maurie Markman and Muhammad Wasif Saif.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety. 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 Drug Safety.

Countries where authors publish in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Expert Opinion on Drug Safety. 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 Drug Safety 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 Drug Safety 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