Countries where authors publish in Research Ethics
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Research Ethics. 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 Research Ethics with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Research Ethics more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers published in Research Ethics. 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 Research Ethics.
About Research Ethics
The 536 papers published in Research Ethics in the last decades have received a total of 4.3k indexed citations . Papers published in Research Ethics usually cover Health Informatics (24 papers), Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (293 papers), General Health Professions (229 papers), Safety Research (68 papers) and Physiology (92 papers) specifically the topics of Ethics in Clinical Research (267 papers), Ethics in medical practice (164 papers), Biomedical Ethics and Regulation (92 papers), Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics (51 papers), Academic integrity and plagiarism (43 papers), Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (27 papers), Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare (27 papers) and Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education (24 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Research Ethics are Ranjan Datta, Jan Dewing, Catherine Flick, David B. Resnik, Nathan Emmerich, Karen Rodham, Jeff Gavin, Stine Lomborg, Joanna Taylor and Claudia Pagliari.
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.