Countries where authors publish in Progrès en Urologie
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Progrès en Urologie. 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 Progrès en Urologie with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Progrès en Urologie more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Progrès en Urologie. 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 Progrès en Urologie.
About Progrès en Urologie
The 2.5k papers published in Progrès en Urologie in the last decades have received a total of 11.7k indexed citations . Papers published in Progrès en Urologie usually cover Urology (442 papers), Rheumatology (405 papers), Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine (776 papers), Surgery (553 papers) and Obstetrics and Gynecology (94 papers) specifically the topics of Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment (334 papers), Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research (320 papers), Pelvic floor disorders treatments (289 papers), Bladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments (206 papers), Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments (188 papers), Renal cell carcinoma treatment (150 papers), Urological Disorders and Treatments (144 papers) and Prostate Cancer Treatment and Research (119 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Progrès en Urologie are Morgan Rouprêt, Olivier Traxer, C. Saussine, É. Lechevallier, Jacques Irani, A. Ruffion, S. Droupy, Emmanuel Chartier‐Kastler, J. Rigaud and François Giuliano.
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.