Are you a researcher?
Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
SCImago
Q1
Impact factor
0.6
SJR
0.182
CiteScore
0.9
Categories
Visual Arts and Performing Arts
Architecture
Areas
Arts and Humanities
Engineering
Years of issue
1996-2025
journal names
Journal of Architecture
J ARCHITECTURE
Top-3 citing journals
Top-3 organizations

University College London
(60 publications)

University of Westminster
(31 publications)

University of Liverpool
(24 publications)

University College London
(8 publications)

University of Manchester
(8 publications)

Delft University of Technology
(7 publications)
Top-3 countries
Most cited in 5 years
Found
Publications found: 885
Q3

An UPLC-MS/MS method for determination of karacoline in mice and its pharmacokinetics study
Huang W., Dong X., Lin R., Ma J.
AbstractIn this experiment, ultra-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) was employed to quantify karacoline in mouse plasma following both intravenous and oral administration, thereby elucidating the pharmacokinetic characteristics of karacoline in mice. The analytes were extracted from mouse plasma using acetonitrile for protein precipitation. Chromatographic separation was performed on an HSS T3 column via gradient elution, with the mobile phase consisting of methanol and 0.1% formic acid in water. Quantification of karacoline and the internal standard (IS) was achieved using multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode. Six mice received an intravenous (i.v.) injection of karacoline at a dose of 1 mg kg−1, while another six mice were administered karacoline orally (p.o.) at a dose of 5 mg kg−1. The calibration curve for karacoline in mouse plasma ranged from 1 ng mL−1 to 2,500 ng mL−1. The intra-day precision was within 10.4%, and the inter-day precision was within 13.0%. Accuracy ranged from 89.1% to 107.5%, with recovery rates between 77.6% and 88.2%. Matrix effects were observed within the range of 77.6%–107.4%. This method successfully estimated the pharmacokinetics of karacoline, and its bioavailability was determined to be 27.2%, these are preliminary studies that require verification on a larger group of animals.
Q3

Ultra-fast eco-friendly UHPLC–MS/MS methodology for the quantification of ASP3026 in human liver microsomes: Evaluation of metabolic stability via in silico software and in vitro metabolic incubation
Attwa M.W., Abdelhameed A.S., Kadi A.A.
AbstractASP3026 is a recently formulated and highly selective inhibitor designed to target the ALK kinase. ASP3026 efficiently inhibited ALK kinase activity and demonstrated superior selectivity at a panel of Tyr-kinases compared to crizotinib. The target of this investigation was to establish a highly accurate, fast, green, and highly sensitive Ultra-high performance liquid chromatography- Tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) technique for assessing the concentration of ASP3026 in human liver microsomes (HLMs). In vitro incubation, the metabolic stability of ASP3026 in HLMs was evaluated using this known approach. The validation steps for the UHPLC-MS/MS analytical technique in the HLMs were performed along with the bio-analytical method validation guidelines settled by the US-FDA. To increase the ecological sustainability of the current UHPLC-MS/MS system, a lower flow rate of 0.3 mL min−1, a shorter elution duration of 1 min, and a reduced consumption of ACN have been implemented. A screening of the chemical structure of ASP3026 for hazardous alerts and metabolic lability was performed by the StarDrop package, that includes the DEREK and P450 modules. The analytical separation of ASP3026 and fenebrutinib (FNB) on the reversed phase Eclipse Plus C18 column was performed using an isocratic mobile phase approach. The calibration curve produced by the ASP3026 showed a linear association over the level range of 1–3,000 ng mL−1. A study was conducted to evaluate the precision and accuracy of UHPLC-MS/MS technology in evaluating both intra-day and inter-day variations. The accuracy exhibited a range of −1.56%–7.33% across various days, and a range of −0.78%–10.66% within the same day. The ASP3026 underwent in vitro half-life and intrinsic clearance measurements, yielding values of 14.32 min and 56.62 mL min−1 kg−1, correspondingly. According to in silico software research, using minor modifications to the piperazine component or substituting the group in drug design has the potential to improve the metabolic safety and stability of novel derivatives in comparison to ASP3026.
Q3

Application of a multivariate optimization strategy to validate an RP-HPLC analytical method for determining hydroxychloroquine sulphate in pharmaceutical products and in forced degradation studies
Toti M.C., Bonfilio R., de Araújo M.B.
AbstractIn this study, a multivariate optimization strategy was used to develop and validate a simple, rapid, accurate, cost-effective, and stability-indicative RP-HPLC analytical method for quantifying hydroxychloroquine sulphate (HCQ) in coated tablets. The validation conditions involved isocratic elution mode, using a mixture of buffer solution at pH 2.2 and methanol (74:26, v/v) as the mobile phase, an Agilent® reverse phase column, model Zorbax Eclipse Plus C18 (250 cm × 4.6 mm × 5 μm), a flow rate of 1.3 mL min−1, column temperature 40 °C and detection at 343 nm. The method showed linearity in the range of 4–44 μg mL−1, with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.9998. Recovery obtained average values of between 99.71 and 100.84% and precision with average RSD values of <2%. The robustness demonstrated by assessing the effect of seven variables (pH of the mobile phase buffer; percentage of methanol; filter brand; mobile phase flow rate; wavelength; column temperature and sample agitation time), with effect values for each variable lower than the calculated value of s√2 (1.43), showed that none of these factors had a significant influence on the analytical response. The method was applied to samples of the reference medicine Plaquinol® 400 mg and similar Reuquinol 400 mg, nomenclature established by the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa), law no. 978 of 10 February 1999, purchased from local pharmacies. Results showed advantages and benefits in relation to the official method and those reported in the literature. The application of the multivariate strategy, the choice of methanol, in a lower proportion in the organic phase, due to its low toxicity, economy and easier availability compared to acetonitrile, and the other organic solvents used was a promising and important alternative for the analytical method. Furthermore, the use of reversed stationary phase, common in quality control laboratories, provided an analyte retention time of 4.595 min, demonstrating good performance and speed in routine analyses.
Q3

A vortex-assisted liquid-liquid extraction followed by dispersive-solid phase extraction (VA-LLE/d-SPE) for the determination of eight benzoylphenylureas insecticides in tomatoes and cucumbers
Alhamami M.A., Algethami J.S., Ramadan M.F., Abdallah O.I.
AbstractMonitoring benzoylphenylureas (BPUs) residues in ready-to-eat vegetables is of great interest for an adequate assessment of human pesticide exposure. A rapid, inexpensive, simple, and effective method for determining 8 BPUs insecticides in tomatoes and cucumbers was developed and validated. Vortex-assisted liquid-liquid extraction (VA-LLE) followed by dispersive solid-phase extraction (d-SPE) using graphitized carbon black (GCB) for cleanup was used before LC-MS/MS analysis. Different parameters were optimized, including the type and volume of extractants, vortex time, and the type and amount of adsorbents used for cleanup. The evaluation showed that the method has excellent linearity (R2 ≥ 0.994). The recovered 8 BPUs insecticides from spiked tomato and cucumber samples at 0.01, 0.05, and 0.25 mg kg−1 ranged from 83.2 to 105.2%, with RSD of 4.9–14.6%. The limits of quantitation (LOQs) were 0.0025 mg kg−1 (0.005 mg kg−1 for lufenuron). Within-day repeatability ranged from 3.9 to 13.9%, while between-day repeatability ranged from 8.9% to 17.7%. The optimized method was used to analyze 100 samples of tomatoes and cucumbers marketed in Saudi Arabia.
Q3

Headspace – Solid phase microextraction vs liquid injection GC-MS analysis of essential oils: Prediction of linear retention indices by multiple linear regression
Hristozova A., Batmazyan M., Simitchiev K., Tsoneva S., Kmetov V., Rosenberg E.
AbstractDue to the relative independence from the operational parameters, the linear retention indices (LRIs) are useful tool in gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) qualitative analysis. The aim of the current study was to develop a multiple linear regression (MLR) model for the prediction of LRIs as a function of selected molecular descriptors. Liquid injection GC-MS was used for the analysis of Essential oils (Rose, Lavender and Peppermint) separating the ingredients by a semi-standard non-polar stationary phase. As a result, a sum of 103 compounds were identified and their experimental LRIs were derived relying on reference measurements of a standard mixture of n-alkanes (from C8 to C20). As a next step, a set of molecular descriptors was generated for the distinguished chemical structures. Further, a stepwise MLR was applied for the selection of the significant descriptors (variables) which can be used to predict the LRIs. From an exploit set of over 2000 molecular descriptors, it was found that only 16 can be regarded as significant and independent variables. At this point split validation was applied: the identified compounds were randomly divided into training (85%) and validation (15%) sets. The training set (87 compounds) was used to derive two MLR models by applying i) the ‘enter’ algorithm (R2 = 0.9960, RMSЕ = 17) and ii) the ‘stepwise’ one (R2 = 0.9958, RMSЕ = 17). The predictive power was assessed by the validation set (16 compounds) as follows i) q2F1 = 0.9896, RMSE = 25 and ii) q2F1 = 0.9886, RMSE = 26, respectively. The adequateness of both regression approaches was further evaluated. Newly developed headspace-solid phase microextraction (HS-SPME) procedures in combination with GC-MS were used for an alternative analysis of the studied Essential oils. Twelve additional compounds, not previously detected by the liquid sample introduction mode of analysis, were identified for which the values of the significant descriptors were within the working range of the developed MLRs. For the last compounds, the LRIs were calculated and the experimental data was used as an external set for assessment of the regression models. The predictive power for both regression approaches was assessed as follows: Enter RMSE = 41, q2F2 = 0.9503 and Stepwise RMSE = 40, q2F2 = 0.9521.
Q3

Development and validation of an analytical method for acetamiprid determination in plant protection products using HPLC-DAD
Marczewska P., Rolnik J., Stobiecki T., Sajewicz M.
AbstractPlant protection products (PPP), crucial for agricultural production, are experiencing increased global demand, particularly with the growing need for food production. To meet this demand, robust analytical methods are essential for confirming the presence and determining active substance concentrations in PPP. This study introduces an analytical method utilizing high-performance liquid chromatography with a diode array detector (HPLC-DAD) for determination of acetamiprid in water-soluble powder formulations. The method, validated according to SANCO/3030/99 rev.5, demonstrated exhibited adequate accuracy and precision, with repeatability expressed as the ratio of the standard deviation (% RSD) to the relative standard deviation (% RSDr) being lower than 1. Recoveries for the active substance at concentrations above 10% ranged from 97% to 103%. The developed method is also characterized by suitable linearity, confirmed by a correlation coefficient >0.99. Specific chromatographic profiles were generated, and acetamiprid content in 180 formulations was analyzed, including reference products. The developed method aligns with “green chemistry” principles, minimizing solvent use and emphasizing energy efficiency. Overall, it offers a comprehensive approach for qualitative and quantitative analysis, ensuring the reliability of PPP quality control.
Q3

Analytical and numerical solutions of linear and nonlinear chromatography column models
Kaczmarski K., Szukiewicz M.K.
AbstractThe advection-convection models (ACM) have practical applications in the investigation of separation processes, where mass (heat) is transferred by convection and diffusion (dispersion) along mass/heat exchanger, eq. adsorption, chromatography column, tubular reactor, etc. The ACM consists of nonlinear partial differential equations which can be solved only with numerical methods. In the article, a comparison of the volume method (VM) and orthogonal collocation on finite elements (OCFE) is presented in terms of their reliability, accuracy of calculations, and speed of calculation. The OCFE proved to be more robust than VM.The linear ACM model for the chromatography column has an analytical solution in the form of the equation for the number of theoretical plates (N). This equation is often applied in the interpretation and evaluation of model parameters. However, the versions of N equation published in the literature are not correct. The error can lead to significant imprecision for specific cases. Here, in the paper, the revised equations are presented and discussed for the most frequently used chromatography column models.
Q3

Methodology for high-performance liquid chromatography detection of latanoprost and latanoprost free acid
Jankowski A.M., Vardar C., Talarico M.V., Wuchte L., Byrne M.E.
AbstractA gradient high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method has been developed to determine the concentrations of latanoprost (LP) and latanoprost free acid (LPA) in aqueous solutions. It is novel due to a combination of its simplicity, speed, and detection capability in aqueous solutions for both active drug (LPA) and prodrug (LP). This method is applicable for the research and development of novel drug delivery devices and quality control assays for experimental and commercial laboratory settings, as it allows for a high sample throughput. Samples were chromatographed across a C18 + 2.7 µm 4.6 × 7.5 mm reversed-phase column with gradient elution using a mobile phase of aqueous acetic acid (pH 3.1) and acetonitrile with 0.1% acetic acid. UV spectrophotometry was used to monitor the eluents at 210 nm. Drug concentrations from 1.0 to 150 μg mL−1 were tested, with good linearity observed across the range. LPA had a signature peak at approximately 4.82 min (SD < 0.08) and LP at 9.27 min (SD < 0.07). For both drug and pro-drug, LOD and LOQ were 1.0 and 2.5 μg mL−1, respectively. This assay which accurately measures both prodrug and drug in a single injection, has significant applicability in determining the release kinetics of novel LP drug delivery systems.
Q3

Identification and structural characterization of potential degradation products of baricitinib using liquid chromatography combined with quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry
Kakouri E., Gkountanas K., Kanakis C., Tarantilis P.A., Dotsikas Y.
AbstractBaricitinib (BRT) is a drug substance with potent anti-inflammatory activity indicated in rheumatoid arthritis, atopic dermatitis, severe alopecia areata and recently for the treatment of Covid-19. Process impurities of the drug during its formulation are quite known, however studies regarding its degradation products (DPs) under stress conditions are limited. In this study, the drug was subjected to forced degradation under various degradation conditions, including acidic hydrolysis, alkaline hydrolysis, oxidative and thermal, to determine its inherent stability. To this purpose, a novel HPLC method was developed for the determination of degradation impurities of BRT. Alkaline hydrolysis test showed a selectivity towards breaking C–C bonds. This resulted to five DPs formed by chain scission reactions occurred at the pyrrolo-pyrimidine group between C6–C10 and C8–C9. Also, the ethylsulfonyl-azetidin-ylidene group was subjected to C–C bond cleavage at C12–C15 and C16–C18. Degradation products were further characterized with the use of liquid chromatography quadrupole time of flight tandem mass spectrometry (LC-Q-TOF-MS/MS).
Q3

Development and validation of a quantitative minilab system for quality evaluation of selected medicines: Albendazole, arthemether-lumefantrine combination (Co-artem®), and mebendazole finished pharmaceutical products
Hasen G., Birhane W., Suleman S., Ashenef A.
AbstractThe current technologies for substandard and counterfeit drug detection are either too expensive for low-resource settings or only provide qualitative or semi-quantitative results. GPHF minilab™ is one of them based on thin layer chromatography(TLC) principles with a semi-quantitative capability by visual observation of the spot area and intensity for medicine quality analysis. Thus, its use as a quality control tool for pharmaceutical products has limitations as spot area and intensity visual observation by the naked eye highly varies from analyst to analyst. As such, in this study, the semi-quantitative technique has been transferred to a quantitative approach by capturing the developed TLC plate image using an Android-based mobile phone inside a simple carton box. Then, the spot area was quantified using justTLC software. The quantitative results were compared with the-high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method as the golden standard. Accordingly, linearity was observed in the assayed range (80–120% label claim), and the correlation coefficients found were (R2 = 0.958, 0.997, 0.941, and 0.956 for Albendazole, Mebendazole, Artemether, and Lumefantrine, respectively.). The values are satisfactory. The %RSDs found were less than 2% for all drugs [intraday (n = 6) (RSD = 1.17, 1.61, 1.87, and 1.64), and interday (n = 18) (RSD = 1.16, 0.72, 1.12, and 1.18) for Artemether, Lumefantrine, Mebendazole, and Albendazole, respectively]. Moreover, comparisons of results obtained from the sophisticated CAMAG UV cabinet (R2 =0.991, 0.971, 0.946, and 0.967) and the developed simple carton box (R2 = 0.958, 0.997, 0.941, and 0.956) for Albendazole, Mebendazole, Artemether, and Lumefantrine, respectively. The values are comparable and reveal the accuracy of the method. Robustness testings' that were performed under different altered conditions revealed the robustness of the method (RSD less than 2% for all factors). Additionally the deviations from the golden HPLC results were on average −8.62% for albendazole, −3.79% for artemether, and −4.52% for lumefantrine samples. The developed method shows a satisfactory performance capability to utilize the GPHF minilab™ as a quantitative technique for medicine quality control purposes. It will be a very useful tool in a resource-limited setting. The target method profile, which encompasses a simple, low-cost, linear, precise, robust, accurate, and quantitative GPHF minilab™ system, was obtained for Albendazole, Mebendazole, and Arthemeter lumefantine combinations (Co-artem). The proposed method was successfully applied to analyze the content of the marketed medicines in the above mentioned tablets and offered acceptable deviations from the golden HPLC method. Automation of quantitative GPHF minilab™ was highly recommended to enhance the appropriateness and use of this system.
Q3

Validation of HPLC-DAD method for analysis of paracetamol and potassium sorbate in liquid oral formulations and its application to forced degradation study
Mikulić M., Sazdanić D., Kladar N., Radulović J., Srđenović Čonić B., Atanacković Krstonošić M.
AbstractDue to the frequent use of paracetamol formulations, it is useful to develop an analytical technique for the determination of intact paracetamol in presence of other drugs and excipients or the degradation products. In this study, a simple, isocratic, fast, specific, accurate and precise stability-indicating high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method has been developed and validated for simultaneous quantitative determination of paracetamol (PCM) and potassium sorbate (PS) in oral liquid formulations. The chromatographic separation was achieved on Zorbax SB C18 column (150 × 4.6 mm, 5 µm) with Zorbax SB C18 precolumn (12.5 × 4.6 mm, 5 µm) using distilled water pH 2 with ortho-phosphoric acid and acetonitrile (70:30, v/v) as a mobile phase, and UV detection at 235 nm. The temperature of the column was kept constant at 25 °C. The method was validated according to International Conference on harmonization (ICH) guidelines. The method demonstrated excellent linearity, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9996 and 0.9998 for PCM and PS, respectively, over the concentration ranges of 10–600 μg mL−1 (PCM) and 6–500 μg mL−1 (PS). The retention time was found to be 1.98 and 4.86 min for PCM and PS, respectively. Oral liquid formulation samples were subjected to various stress conditions (acidic and alkaline hydrolysis, as well as oxidative, heat and photolytic degradation) for the purpose of forced degradation study. The major degradation of paracetamol was achieved in acidic and basic stress conditions, while thermal and photolytic degradation generally had the least influence. On the other hand, potassium sorbate was highly susceptible to photolytic degradation. It was also shown that the formulation has strong influence on stability of tested compounds. Forced degradation studies demonstrated the stability-indicating power of the method and can be used to assess the stability of paracetamol and potassium sorbate in oral liquid formulations.
Q3

A simple, rapid, and green method for determination of three cholic acids in bio-transformed Jindanfen by HPLC-MS
Qian Z., Huang Q., Wang F., Lei Q., He Z., Wu Q., Wu M., Gao J.
AbstractA simple, rapid, and green high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS) method was developed for determination of tauroursodeoxycholic acid (TUDCA), taurocholic acid (TCA), and taurochenodeoxycholic acid (TCDCA) in bio-transformed Jindanfen (BTJDF), which is obtained from chicken bile through a bioconversion process. The sample was prepared using water. The HPLC separation was operated on a poroshell 120 EC-C18 column with a 2.0 min gradient elution procedure. Detection was performed on a single quadrupole mass spectrometer in negative mode with selected ion monitoring mode (SIM). This developed HPLC-MS method presented good linearity (r > 0.997) and sensitivity (limit of quantification, 30.0–80.0 pg) for three analytes. The relative standard deviations (RSDs) for precision, repeatability, and stability were all below 3.00%. The matrix effects and average recoveries of three analytes were 91.2–97.9% (RSDs < 1.50%) and 95.4–103% (RSDs < 3.00%), respectively. The average contents of TUDCA, TCA, and TCDCA in ten batches of samples were 33.8, 13.2, and 20.5%, respectively. Finally, the greenness of the developed method was validated by Analytical Eco-Scale and Complex-GAPI. The developed method was proved to be an eco-friendly, effective, and reliable approach for assaying the three cholic acids in BTJDF, which is help to improve the quality evaluation level of the BTJDF industry.
Q3

Development of an HPLC-UV method for the simultaneous determination of allantoin and D-panthenol in cosmetic products containing Aloe vera extracts
Ceylan B., Kepekci Tekkeli S.E.
AbstractA simple, fast and selective analytical method has been developed for the simultaneous determination of allantoin and D-panthenol in cosmetic products containing Aloe vera extracts. The proposed method depends on reversed-phase liquid chromatography with isocratic flow profile of the mobile phase composed of acetonitrile–10 mM phosphoric acid (pH 2.5) (85:15, v/v), with a C18 column at 30 °C. The analytes were detected with UV–vis. detector at 210 nm. The injection volume was 20 μL. The linearity ranges were found to be 0.2–20 and 0.1–10 μg mL−1 for allantoin and D-panthenol, respectively. LOD values were found to be 0.07 μg mL−1 and 0.03 μg mL−1, LOQ values were found to be 0.2 and 0.1 μg mL−1 for allantoin and D-panthenol, respectively. No interference was observed from concomitants. The developed method was applied to the analysis of 10 different type cosmetic products. It is foreseen that the method will be able to be used in order to carry out routine analysis, quality control and standardization in cosmetic products containing allantoin and D-panthenol.
Q3

DoE-empowered development and validation of an environmentally sustainable RP-HPLC method for simultaneous estimation of antihypertensive drugs: AQbD perspective
Gopalaiah S.B., Jayaseelan K.
AbstractThe primary objective of the present inquiry is to formulate a sustainable method employing Reverse Phase-High Performance Liquid Chromatography (RP-HPLC) for determination of Amlodipine (AM) and Irbesartan (IRB) simultaneously, compounds commonly prescribed for hypertension treatment. Existing literature underscores the absence of a comprehensive method in this regard. This research endeavors to align with the tenets of green chemistry by seamlessly integrating Analytical Quality by Design (AQbD) with RP-HPLC, replacing environmentally hazardous chemical modifiers with eco-friendly solvents. Identifying the critical variables as the 70% ethanol level and flow rate, a central composite design is applied for optimization. The separation is achieved utilizing a Phenomenex Luna column (C18, 250 mm × 4.6 mm i.d, 5 μm) with a mobile phase comprising ethanol and 0.1 % o-phosphoric acid in a 70:30 v/v ratio, flowing at 0.8 mL min−1, and detection wavelength of 242 nm. Green assessment methodologies are implemented to gauge the adherence of the proposed RP-HPLC method to eco-friendly principles while ensuring efficiency in chromatographic performance. The current developed method is rapid with retention time of 2.3 and 3.3 min for AM and IRB respectively and having a wide linear range from 55 to 130 μg mL−1, which makes the suitable for the accurate quantification of AM and IRB simultaneously in bulk and tablet dosage form, there by minimize environmental impact by providing a conscientious choice for the routine analysis which is achieved through the amalgamation of AQbD with a sustainable approach.
Q3

The effect of different washing methods assisted by ultrasound on the removal of cypermethrin and spirotetramat residues in apples
Suyabatmaz A.M., Yakar Y.
AbstractThe simplest way to remove pesticide residues from fruits and vegetables is to wash them with tap water. However, this method is not effective enough. In this study, the effectiveness of different washing methods assisted by ultrasound on pesticide removal was investigated. For this purpose firstly, apples were soaked in a cypermethrin (CYP) and spirotetramat (SPI) solution, which are frequently used as insecticides. Subsequently, the apples were washed in solutions prepared with vinegar, lemon juice, and baking soda at different concentrations (0.5%, 1% and 2%) and assisted by ultrasound (2.5–5 min). The residues in the medicated and washed samples were analysed on an LC-MS/MS instrument after extraction using the QuEChERS extraction method. The results of the analysis showed that acidic vinegar and lemon juice were more effective than baking soda. Moreover, the application of ultrasound significantly increased this effect. When a 0.5% vinegar solution was assisted by ultrasound, 62% of the cypermethrin residue was removed and 82% of the spirotetramat residue was removed. These values were 51.5% and 49.6% higher than tap water, respectively. In conclusion, acidic solutions such as vinegar, which we can easily prepare at home, are highly effective in removing pesticide residues when assisted by ultrasound.
Top-100
Citing journals
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
|
|
Planning Perspectives
88 citations, 3.19%
|
|
Buildings
64 citations, 2.32%
|
|
Sustainability
55 citations, 2%
|
|
Frontiers of Architectural Research
51 citations, 1.85%
|
|
Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering
28 citations, 1.02%
|
|
Archnet-IJAR
26 citations, 0.94%
|
|
Cities
26 citations, 0.94%
|
|
Home Cultures
23 citations, 0.83%
|
|
Urban Studies
22 citations, 0.8%
|
|
Architecture and Culture
21 citations, 0.76%
|
|
Political Geography
20 citations, 0.73%
|
|
City
20 citations, 0.73%
|
|
Landscape Research
20 citations, 0.73%
|
|
Open House International
20 citations, 0.73%
|
|
Urban Book Series
17 citations, 0.62%
|
|
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research
17 citations, 0.62%
|
|
Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering
16 citations, 0.58%
|
|
Land
16 citations, 0.58%
|
|
International Journal of Heritage Studies
16 citations, 0.58%
|
|
Interiors: Design, Architecture, Culture
16 citations, 0.58%
|
|
Urban Planning
15 citations, 0.54%
|
|
Comparative Studies in Society and History
15 citations, 0.54%
|
|
Urban History
15 citations, 0.54%
|
|
Space and Culture
15 citations, 0.54%
|
|
IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
14 citations, 0.51%
|
|
Building and Environment
14 citations, 0.51%
|
|
Urban Design International
14 citations, 0.51%
|
|
Emotion, Space and Society
14 citations, 0.51%
|
|
Habitat International
14 citations, 0.51%
|
|
Journal of Urban Design
12 citations, 0.44%
|
|
Geography Compass
12 citations, 0.44%
|
|
Gender, Place, and Culture
12 citations, 0.44%
|
|
Environment and Planning A
12 citations, 0.44%
|
|
Building Research and Information
12 citations, 0.44%
|
|
Environment and Planning D: Society and Space
11 citations, 0.4%
|
|
Journal of Housing and the Built Environment
11 citations, 0.4%
|
|
Journal of Building Engineering
11 citations, 0.4%
|
|
Learning Environments Research
11 citations, 0.4%
|
|
Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography
10 citations, 0.36%
|
|
HERD
10 citations, 0.36%
|
|
Journal of Urbanism
10 citations, 0.36%
|
|
Nexus Network Journal
10 citations, 0.36%
|
|
IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering
10 citations, 0.36%
|
|
Religions
10 citations, 0.36%
|
|
Architectural Engineering and Design Management
10 citations, 0.36%
|
|
Energy and Buildings
10 citations, 0.36%
|
|
AIP Conference Proceedings
10 citations, 0.36%
|
|
Urban Geography
9 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Architectural Science Review
9 citations, 0.33%
|
|
International Journal of Architectural Computing
9 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers
9 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Progress in Human Geography
9 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Journal of Architecture and Urbanism
9 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Architectural History
9 citations, 0.33%
|
|
Space and Polity
9 citations, 0.33%
|
|
City, Territory and Architecture
8 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Journal of Cultural Heritage Management and Sustainable Development
8 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Antipode
8 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Cogent Arts and Humanities
8 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Memory Studies
8 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences
8 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Environment and Planning B Urban Analytics and City Science
8 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians
7 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Visual Studies
7 citations, 0.25%
|
|
SAGE Open
7 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Education Inquiry
7 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Heritage Science
7 citations, 0.25%
|
|
SHS Web of Conferences
7 citations, 0.25%
|
|
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Design Studies
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Grey Room
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Engineering Structures
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Journal of Architecture
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Eurasian Geography and Economics
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Architectural Histories
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Qualitative Social Work
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Indoor and Built Environment
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Heritage
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Journal of Interior Design
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Historic Environment: Policy and Practice
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
International Journal of Art and Design Education
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Current Issues in Tourism
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Journal of Environmental Psychology
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Mobilities
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Ain Shams Engineering Journal
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Museum Management and Curatorship
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Heritage and Society
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Design Journal
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
European Planning Studies
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Journal of Cultural Geography
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Architecture
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Buildings and Cities
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Second International Handbook of Mathematics Education
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Handbook of Research on Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Sustainable Development Goals Series
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Frontiers in Psychology
4 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Journal of Structural Engineering
4 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
|
Citing publishers
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
|
|
Taylor & Francis
708 citations, 25.69%
|
|
Elsevier
316 citations, 11.47%
|
|
Springer Nature
233 citations, 8.45%
|
|
SAGE
211 citations, 7.66%
|
|
MDPI
196 citations, 7.11%
|
|
Wiley
121 citations, 4.39%
|
|
Emerald
95 citations, 3.45%
|
|
Cambridge University Press
85 citations, 3.08%
|
|
Duke University Press
50 citations, 1.81%
|
|
IOP Publishing
28 citations, 1.02%
|
|
IGI Global
17 citations, 0.62%
|
|
Frontiers Media S.A.
16 citations, 0.58%
|
|
Oxford University Press
15 citations, 0.54%
|
|
15 citations, 0.54%
|
|
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
15 citations, 0.54%
|
|
Ubiquity Press
13 citations, 0.47%
|
|
Intellect
12 citations, 0.44%
|
|
Walter de Gruyter
11 citations, 0.4%
|
|
EDP Sciences
11 citations, 0.4%
|
|
AIP Publishing
10 citations, 0.36%
|
|
MIT Press
8 citations, 0.29%
|
|
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
8 citations, 0.29%
|
|
University of California Press
7 citations, 0.25%
|
|
University of Chicago Press
7 citations, 0.25%
|
|
Trans Tech Publications
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Architectural Institute of Japan
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Hindawi Limited
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Scandinavian University Press / Universitetsforlaget AS
6 citations, 0.22%
|
|
Liverpool University Press
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Vilnius Gediminas Technical University
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Centre for Evaluation in Education and Science (CEON/CEES)
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
OpenEdition
5 citations, 0.18%
|
|
Edinburgh University Press
4 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Brill
4 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
4 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Copernicus
4 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Ain Shams University
4 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Stichting Architecten Research
4 citations, 0.15%
|
|
Berghahn Books
4 citations, 0.15%
|
|
BSTU named after V.G. Shukhov
4 citations, 0.15%
|
|
BMJ
3 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Moscow State University of Civil Engineering
3 citations, 0.11%
|
|
University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress)
3 citations, 0.11%
|
|
Japan Surgical Association
3 citations, 0.11%
|
|
American Chemical Society (ACS)
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
John Benjamins Publishing Company
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Indiana University Press
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Katholieke Universiteit, Instituut voor Culturele en Sociale Antropologie, University Of Nijmegen
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
College Publications
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Tsinghua University Press
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
James Cook University
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Samara State Technical University
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Sustainable Building Research Center
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Alexandria University
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
Social Science Electronic Publishing
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
SciELO
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
CAIRN
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
IntechOpen
2 citations, 0.07%
|
|
IOS Press
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS)
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
The Royal Society
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
American Institute of Mathematical Sciences (AIMS)
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Latvia University of Life Sciences and Technologies
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Urban Planning Institute of the Republic of Slovenia
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Fundacao Oswaldo Cruz
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Index Copernicus
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
PeerJ
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Academic Publication Council - Kuwait University
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Association de Geographes Francais
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Alexandrine Press
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Tuberculosis Association of India
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Centre National De La Recherche Scientifique
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Institut fur Afrika-Kunde
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Korean Society of Design Science
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Association for the Sociology of Religion
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Centro de estudos sociais
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Instituto de Florestas
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Editora Champagnat
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Society for Values in Higher Education
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Universidad Nacional de Lanus
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Spatial Planning and Sustainable Development
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Thomas Telford
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
American Psychological Association (APA)
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Akademiai Kiado
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Scientific Research Publishing
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Baishideng Publishing Group
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Institute of Research and Community Services Diponegoro University (LPPM UNDIP)
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Human Kinetics
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Consortium Erudit
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht GmbH & Co, KG
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
AOSIS
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
UCL Press
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
The City Planning Institute of Japan
1 citation, 0.04%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
|
Publishing organizations
10
20
30
40
50
60
|
|
University College London
60 publications, 4.46%
|
|
University of Westminster
31 publications, 2.31%
|
|
University of Liverpool
24 publications, 1.79%
|
|
University of Melbourne
23 publications, 1.71%
|
|
Delft University of Technology
20 publications, 1.49%
|
|
University of Manchester
19 publications, 1.41%
|
|
University of Cambridge
18 publications, 1.34%
|
|
University of Edinburgh
18 publications, 1.34%
|
|
Ghent University
16 publications, 1.19%
|
|
University of Technology Sydney
16 publications, 1.19%
|
|
University of Queensland
16 publications, 1.19%
|
|
ETH Zurich
15 publications, 1.12%
|
|
University of Nottingham
15 publications, 1.12%
|
|
Technion – Israel Institute of Technology
14 publications, 1.04%
|
|
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
12 publications, 0.89%
|
|
University of Sydney
11 publications, 0.82%
|
|
University of Sheffield
11 publications, 0.82%
|
|
Tel Aviv University
9 publications, 0.67%
|
|
Harvard University
9 publications, 0.67%
|
|
Newcastle University
9 publications, 0.67%
|
|
University of Michigan
8 publications, 0.6%
|
|
University of Greenwich
8 publications, 0.6%
|
|
Yale University
7 publications, 0.52%
|
|
City University of Hong Kong
7 publications, 0.52%
|
|
University of Hong Kong
7 publications, 0.52%
|
|
University of California, Berkeley
7 publications, 0.52%
|
|
University at Buffalo, State University of New York
7 publications, 0.52%
|
|
University of Reading
7 publications, 0.52%
|
|
University of Ulster
7 publications, 0.52%
|
|
Oxford Brookes University
6 publications, 0.45%
|
|
Georgia Institute of technology
6 publications, 0.45%
|
|
Columbia University
6 publications, 0.45%
|
|
Leeds Beckett University
6 publications, 0.45%
|
|
Bilkent University
5 publications, 0.37%
|
|
KTH Royal Institute of Technology
5 publications, 0.37%
|
|
University of New South Wales
5 publications, 0.37%
|
|
Queen Mary University of London
5 publications, 0.37%
|
|
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
5 publications, 0.37%
|
|
National University of Singapore
5 publications, 0.37%
|
|
Monash University
5 publications, 0.37%
|
|
University of Buenos Aires
5 publications, 0.37%
|
|
University of Zaragoza
5 publications, 0.37%
|
|
Middle East Technical University
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Cyprus
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Kuwait University
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Helsinki
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Antwerp
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Kingston University
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Cornell University
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Newcastle Australia
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Princeton University
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Washington University in St. Louis
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Virginia Tech
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Arizona
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
National Technical University of Athens
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
McGill University
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Seville
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
University of Houston
4 publications, 0.3%
|
|
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
University of Basel
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
University of Strathclyde
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
Iowa State University
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
IUAV University of Venice
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
University of Auckland
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
Deakin University
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
Hanyang University
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
Northwestern University
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
Syracuse University
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
Morgan State University
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
Max Planck Institute for the History of Science
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
University of Amsterdam
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
Cardiff University
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
University of Belgrade
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
Miami University
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
University College Dublin
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
University of Portsmouth
3 publications, 0.22%
|
|
Istanbul Technical University
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
University of Sharjah
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
Izmir Institute of Technology
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
Izmir University of Economics
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
Tongji University
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
University of Technology, Malaysia
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
University of Lisbon
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
Aalto University
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
University of Bologna
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
University of Dundee
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
University of Copenhagen
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
William Marsh Rice University
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
Universite Libre de Bruxelles
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
University of Western Australia
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
University of Adelaide
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
University of Tasmania
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
Victoria University (Australia)
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
Korea University
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
Soongsil University
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
Hongik University
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
University of California, Los Angeles
2 publications, 0.15%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
10
20
30
40
50
60
|
Publishing organizations in 5 years
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
|
|
University College London
8 publications, 3.24%
|
|
University of Manchester
8 publications, 3.24%
|
|
Delft University of Technology
7 publications, 2.83%
|
|
University of Edinburgh
7 publications, 2.83%
|
|
Tel Aviv University
6 publications, 2.43%
|
|
ETH Zurich
6 publications, 2.43%
|
|
University of Cambridge
6 publications, 2.43%
|
|
University of Melbourne
6 publications, 2.43%
|
|
University of Liverpool
4 publications, 1.62%
|
|
University of Queensland
4 publications, 1.62%
|
|
Newcastle University
4 publications, 1.62%
|
|
Technion – Israel Institute of Technology
3 publications, 1.21%
|
|
University of Helsinki
3 publications, 1.21%
|
|
University of Hong Kong
3 publications, 1.21%
|
|
University of Amsterdam
3 publications, 1.21%
|
|
Leeds Beckett University
3 publications, 1.21%
|
|
University of Sheffield
3 publications, 1.21%
|
|
University of Portsmouth
3 publications, 1.21%
|
|
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
Ghent University
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of Lisbon
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
Beijing University of Civil Engineering and Architecture
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
Aalto University
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of New South Wales
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of Technology Sydney
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of Copenhagen
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of Nottingham
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
William Marsh Rice University
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
Cornell University
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of Sydney
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
Monash University
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of Newcastle Australia
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of California, Berkeley
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
Harvard University
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University at Buffalo, State University of New York
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
McGill University
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of Seville
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
Northumbria University
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of Porto
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
Polytechnic University of Valencia
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of Reading
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of Huddersfield
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
University of Greenwich
2 publications, 0.81%
|
|
Bilkent University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Istanbul Technical University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Tehran
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Sharjah
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Zayed University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Izmir University of Economics
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Islamic Azad University of Tabriz
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Zhejiang University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Shanghai Jiao Tong University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Huazhong University of Science and Technology
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Sapir Academic College
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Eskisehir Technical University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Altınbaş University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Uppsala University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Radboud University Nijmegen
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Umeå University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Blekinge Institute of Technology
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Chongqing University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Basel
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Bologna
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Université Catholique de Louvain
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Jyväskylä
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Southern Denmark
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Cagliari
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
London School of Economics and Political Science
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Queensland University of Technology
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Birmingham
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Yale University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Universite Libre de Bruxelles
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Pisa
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Trento
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Ferrara
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Calabria
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Auckland
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Tasmania
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Victoria University (Australia)
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Columbia University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Korea University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Washington University in St. Louis
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
City University of Hong Kong
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Northwestern University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Syracuse University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Kwangwoon University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Soongsil University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Incheon National University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of California, Santa Barbara
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Southwest Forestry University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Queen's University Belfast
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
National Technical University of Athens
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Thessaly
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Macau University of Science and Technology
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Hasselt University
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of Bristol
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
University of the West of England
1 publication, 0.4%
|
|
Show all (70 more) | |
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
|
Publishing countries
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
|
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 356, 26.49%
United Kingdom
356 publications, 26.49%
|
USA
|
USA, 180, 13.39%
USA
180 publications, 13.39%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 102, 7.59%
Australia
102 publications, 7.59%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 35, 2.6%
Belgium
35 publications, 2.6%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 28, 2.08%
Israel
28 publications, 2.08%
|
China
|
China, 27, 2.01%
China
27 publications, 2.01%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 27, 2.01%
Netherlands
27 publications, 2.01%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 21, 1.56%
Spain
21 publications, 1.56%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 21, 1.56%
Turkey
21 publications, 1.56%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 21, 1.56%
Switzerland
21 publications, 1.56%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 16, 1.19%
Italy
16 publications, 1.19%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 15, 1.12%
Republic of Korea
15 publications, 1.12%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 13, 0.97%
Germany
13 publications, 0.97%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 12, 0.89%
Canada
12 publications, 0.89%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 12, 0.89%
Sweden
12 publications, 0.89%
|
Portugal
|
Portugal, 11, 0.82%
Portugal
11 publications, 0.82%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 11, 0.82%
Norway
11 publications, 0.82%
|
France
|
France, 10, 0.74%
France
10 publications, 0.74%
|
Argentina
|
Argentina, 8, 0.6%
Argentina
8 publications, 0.6%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 8, 0.6%
Finland
8 publications, 0.6%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 7, 0.52%
Greece
7 publications, 0.52%
|
Cyprus
|
Cyprus, 7, 0.52%
Cyprus
7 publications, 0.52%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 7, 0.52%
New Zealand
7 publications, 0.52%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 6, 0.45%
Denmark
6 publications, 0.45%
|
Estonia
|
Estonia, 5, 0.37%
Estonia
5 publications, 0.37%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 5, 0.37%
Brazil
5 publications, 0.37%
|
Singapore
|
Singapore, 5, 0.37%
Singapore
5 publications, 0.37%
|
Kuwait
|
Kuwait, 4, 0.3%
Kuwait
4 publications, 0.3%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 4, 0.3%
Chile
4 publications, 0.3%
|
Ireland
|
Ireland, 3, 0.22%
Ireland
3 publications, 0.22%
|
UAE
|
UAE, 3, 0.22%
UAE
3 publications, 0.22%
|
Poland
|
Poland, 3, 0.22%
Poland
3 publications, 0.22%
|
Serbia
|
Serbia, 3, 0.22%
Serbia
3 publications, 0.22%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 2, 0.15%
Austria
2 publications, 0.15%
|
Ghana
|
Ghana, 2, 0.15%
Ghana
2 publications, 0.15%
|
Iraq
|
Iraq, 2, 0.15%
Iraq
2 publications, 0.15%
|
Iran
|
Iran, 2, 0.15%
Iran
2 publications, 0.15%
|
Lithuania
|
Lithuania, 2, 0.15%
Lithuania
2 publications, 0.15%
|
Malaysia
|
Malaysia, 2, 0.15%
Malaysia
2 publications, 0.15%
|
Romania
|
Romania, 2, 0.15%
Romania
2 publications, 0.15%
|
Algeria
|
Algeria, 1, 0.07%
Algeria
1 publication, 0.07%
|
Jordan
|
Jordan, 1, 0.07%
Jordan
1 publication, 0.07%
|
Iceland
|
Iceland, 1, 0.07%
Iceland
1 publication, 0.07%
|
Costa Rica
|
Costa Rica, 1, 0.07%
Costa Rica
1 publication, 0.07%
|
Lebanon
|
Lebanon, 1, 0.07%
Lebanon
1 publication, 0.07%
|
Malta
|
Malta, 1, 0.07%
Malta
1 publication, 0.07%
|
Mexico
|
Mexico, 1, 0.07%
Mexico
1 publication, 0.07%
|
Nigeria
|
Nigeria, 1, 0.07%
Nigeria
1 publication, 0.07%
|
Slovakia
|
Slovakia, 1, 0.07%
Slovakia
1 publication, 0.07%
|
Eritrea
|
Eritrea, 1, 0.07%
Eritrea
1 publication, 0.07%
|
South Africa
|
South Africa, 1, 0.07%
South Africa
1 publication, 0.07%
|
Show all (21 more) | |
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
|
Publishing countries in 5 years
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
|
|
United Kingdom
|
United Kingdom, 70, 28.34%
United Kingdom
70 publications, 28.34%
|
USA
|
USA, 27, 10.93%
USA
27 publications, 10.93%
|
Australia
|
Australia, 21, 8.5%
Australia
21 publications, 8.5%
|
China
|
China, 12, 4.86%
China
12 publications, 4.86%
|
Netherlands
|
Netherlands, 12, 4.86%
Netherlands
12 publications, 4.86%
|
Spain
|
Spain, 11, 4.45%
Spain
11 publications, 4.45%
|
Israel
|
Israel, 10, 4.05%
Israel
10 publications, 4.05%
|
Portugal
|
Portugal, 8, 3.24%
Portugal
8 publications, 3.24%
|
Switzerland
|
Switzerland, 8, 3.24%
Switzerland
8 publications, 3.24%
|
Belgium
|
Belgium, 6, 2.43%
Belgium
6 publications, 2.43%
|
Italy
|
Italy, 6, 2.43%
Italy
6 publications, 2.43%
|
Finland
|
Finland, 6, 2.43%
Finland
6 publications, 2.43%
|
Canada
|
Canada, 5, 2.02%
Canada
5 publications, 2.02%
|
Sweden
|
Sweden, 5, 2.02%
Sweden
5 publications, 2.02%
|
Denmark
|
Denmark, 4, 1.62%
Denmark
4 publications, 1.62%
|
France
|
France, 3, 1.21%
France
3 publications, 1.21%
|
Republic of Korea
|
Republic of Korea, 3, 1.21%
Republic of Korea
3 publications, 1.21%
|
Turkey
|
Turkey, 3, 1.21%
Turkey
3 publications, 1.21%
|
Germany
|
Germany, 2, 0.81%
Germany
2 publications, 0.81%
|
Brazil
|
Brazil, 2, 0.81%
Brazil
2 publications, 0.81%
|
Greece
|
Greece, 2, 0.81%
Greece
2 publications, 0.81%
|
Iran
|
Iran, 2, 0.81%
Iran
2 publications, 0.81%
|
New Zealand
|
New Zealand, 2, 0.81%
New Zealand
2 publications, 0.81%
|
Norway
|
Norway, 2, 0.81%
Norway
2 publications, 0.81%
|
UAE
|
UAE, 2, 0.81%
UAE
2 publications, 0.81%
|
Chile
|
Chile, 2, 0.81%
Chile
2 publications, 0.81%
|
Estonia
|
Estonia, 1, 0.4%
Estonia
1 publication, 0.4%
|
Austria
|
Austria, 1, 0.4%
Austria
1 publication, 0.4%
|
Ghana
|
Ghana, 1, 0.4%
Ghana
1 publication, 0.4%
|
Iraq
|
Iraq, 1, 0.4%
Iraq
1 publication, 0.4%
|
Cyprus
|
Cyprus, 1, 0.4%
Cyprus
1 publication, 0.4%
|
Costa Rica
|
Costa Rica, 1, 0.4%
Costa Rica
1 publication, 0.4%
|
Mexico
|
Mexico, 1, 0.4%
Mexico
1 publication, 0.4%
|
Nigeria
|
Nigeria, 1, 0.4%
Nigeria
1 publication, 0.4%
|
Poland
|
Poland, 1, 0.4%
Poland
1 publication, 0.4%
|
Show all (5 more) | |
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
|