Countries where authors publish in Molecular Brain
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Molecular Brain. 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 Molecular Brain with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Molecular Brain more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Molecular Brain. 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 Molecular Brain.
About Molecular Brain
The 1.4k papers published in Molecular Brain in the last decades have received a total of 41.8k indexed citations . Papers published in Molecular Brain usually cover Developmental Neuroscience (121 papers), Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience (552 papers), Neurology (150 papers), Behavioral Neuroscience (56 papers) and Biological Psychiatry (36 papers) specifically the topics of Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research (342 papers), Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms (119 papers), Memory and Neural Mechanisms (116 papers), Neurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms (105 papers), Alzheimer's disease research and treatments (96 papers), Pain Mechanisms and Treatments (89 papers), Ion channel regulation and function (80 papers) and Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders (79 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Molecular Brain are Eric R. Kandel, Tsuyoshi Miyakawa, Min Zhuo, Hideyuki Okano, Huaxi Xu, Yun‐wu Zhang, Jae‐Young Koh, Robert C. Thompson, Han Zhang and Keizo Takao.
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.