Medical Hypotheses

11.2k papers and 151.7k indexed citations

About

The 11.2k papers published in Medical Hypotheses in the last decades have received a total of 151.7k indexed citations. Papers published in Medical Hypotheses usually cover Molecular Biology (2.5k papers), Physiology (1.5k papers) and Surgery (1.2k papers) specifically the topics of Diet and metabolism studies (292 papers), Neuroscience of respiration and sleep (291 papers) and Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research (276 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Medical Hypotheses are Mark F. McCarty, R.S. Smith, David F. Horrobin, Shih‐Jen Tsai, Paul G. Cohen, Peter Kovacic, C.P. Maurizi, Leo Sher, Susan R. Johnson and George A. Eby.

In The Last Decade

Medical Hypotheses

10.6k papers receiving 143.2k citations

Fields of papers published in Medical Hypotheses

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Medical Hypotheses. 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 Medical Hypotheses.

Countries where authors publish in Medical Hypotheses

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Medical Hypotheses. 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 Medical Hypotheses with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Medical Hypotheses 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
2026