Amasa B. Ford
- General Health Professions top 2%
- Health top 2%
- Epidemiology top 10%
- Sociology and Political Science top 10%
- Psychiatry and Mental health top 5%
- Co-authors
- Herman K. HellersteinMarie R. HaugNorman B. RushforthSteven FolmarPaul K. JonesCharles S. HirschLester AdelsonSidney Katz
- Topics
- Health disparities and outcomes (6 papers)Healthcare Policy and Management (5 papers)Global Health Care Issues (4 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesUnited KingdomNorway
In The Last Decade
Amasa B. Ford
71 papers receiving 1.6k citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 150
- General Health Professions 493
- Health 407
- Epidemiology 307
- Sociology and Political Science 235
- Psychiatry and Mental health 221
Countries citing papers authored by Amasa B. Ford
This map shows the geographic impact of Amasa B. Ford's research. 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 Amasa B. Ford with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Amasa B. Ford more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Amasa B. Ford
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Amasa B. Ford. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Amasa B. Ford. The network helps show where Amasa B. Ford may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Amasa B. Ford
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Amasa B. Ford. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Amasa B. Ford based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Amasa B. Ford. Amasa B. Ford is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | |
| 2 | 90 | |
| 3 | 7 | |
| 4 | 17 | |
| 5 | 17 | |
| 6 | 43 | |
| 7 | 8 | |
| 8 | 104 | |
| 9 | 12 | |
| 10 | Practice of Geriatrics | 63 |
| 11 | 26 | |
| 12 | 1 | |
| 13 | 4 | |
| 14 | 17 | |
| 15 | 53 | |
| 16 | Casualties of our time. | 8 |
| 17 | The Doctor's perspective : physicians view their patients and practice | 4 |
| 18 | Predicting Judged Quality of Patient Care in General Hospitals | 4 |
| 19 | 8 | |
| 20 | 57 |
About Amasa B. Ford
Amasa B. Ford is a scholar working on Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology, Health and Medical Laboratory Technology, having authored 73 papers that have together received 1.9k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Health disparities and outcomes (6 papers), Healthcare Policy and Management (5 papers) and Global Health Care Issues (4 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology (126 citations), Health (407 citations) and Geriatrics and Gerontology (129 citations). Amasa B. Ford has collaborated with scholars based in United States, United Kingdom and Norway. Frequent co-authors include Herman K. Hellerstein, Marie R. Haug, Norman B. Rushforth, Steven Folmar, Paul K. Jones, Charles S. Hirsch, Lester Adelson, Sidney Katz, Kurt C. Stange and Atwood D. Gaines. Their work appears in journals such as Science, New England Journal of Medicine and JAMA.
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.