Andrew R. Claxton

785 total citations
7 papers, 277 citations indexed

About

Andrew R. Claxton is a scholar working on Surgery, Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine and Pathology and Forensic Medicine. According to data from OpenAlex, Andrew R. Claxton has authored 7 papers receiving a total of 277 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 6 papers in Surgery, 3 papers in Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine and 2 papers in Pathology and Forensic Medicine. Recurrent topics in Andrew R. Claxton's work include Anesthesia and Pain Management (4 papers), Spinal Cord Injury Research (2 papers) and Pain Management and Opioid Use (2 papers). Andrew R. Claxton is often cited by papers focused on Anesthesia and Pain Management (4 papers), Spinal Cord Injury Research (2 papers) and Pain Management and Opioid Use (2 papers). Andrew R. Claxton collaborates with scholars based in Canada, India and United Kingdom. Andrew R. Claxton's co-authors include Frances Chung, Michael G. Fehlings, Glenn McGuire, David T. Wong, Charles Cruise, Anthony Miniaci, Vincent Chan, Philip Peng and Ian Smith and has published in prestigious journals such as Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia and Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d anesthésie.

In The Last Decade

Andrew R. Claxton

7 papers receiving 258 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Andrew R. Claxton Canada	5	202	105	63	46	35	7	277
Tama K. Van Decar United States	8	240 1.2×	35 0.3×	221 3.5×	67 1.5×	30 0.9×	11	353
George A. Albright United States	8	262 1.3×	53 0.5×	89 1.4×	18 0.4×	8 0.2×	16	331
F. J. Husain United States	9	195 1.0×	29 0.3×	68 1.1×	40 0.9×	14 0.4×	14	311
Bernard Wittels United States	8	180 0.9×	15 0.1×	92 1.5×	34 0.7×	13 0.4×	11	310
Scott G. Walker United States	9	241 1.2×	23 0.2×	163 2.6×	36 0.8×	14 0.4×	17	351
Marie-Caroline Nogaro United Kingdom	5	58 0.3×	27 0.3×	124 2.0×	20 0.4×	28 0.8×	9	298
M. C. Ewart United Kingdom	10	133 0.7×	36 0.3×	108 1.7×	37 0.8×	5 0.1×	12	242
Poupak Rahimzadeh Iran	12	215 1.1×	43 0.4×	144 2.3×	31 0.7×	12 0.3×	25	310
John W. Bradley Canada	4	268 1.3×	48 0.5×	231 3.7×	30 0.7×	9 0.3×	9	367
Mercedes Concepción United States	12	271 1.3×	40 0.4×	100 1.6×	38 0.8×	12 0.3×	22	355

Countries citing papers authored by Andrew R. Claxton

Since Specialization

Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Andrew R. Claxton'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 Andrew R. Claxton with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Andrew R. Claxton more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Andrew R. Claxton

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Andrew R. Claxton. 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 Andrew R. Claxton. The network helps show where Andrew R. Claxton may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Andrew R. Claxton

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Andrew R. Claxton. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Andrew R. Claxton 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 Andrew R. Claxton. Andrew R. Claxton is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

Sort: Min cites: Since: Top N: Style:

7 of 7 papers shown

1.

Peng, Philip, et al.. (1999). Femoral nerve block and ketorolac in patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d anesthésie. 46(10). 919–924. 47 indexed citations

2.

Peng, Philip, et al.. (1998). FEMORAL NERVE BLOCK IMPROVES POSTOPERATIVE PAIN CONTROL IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT REPAIR. Anesthesiology. 89(Supplement). 1122A–1122A. 1 indexed citations

3.

Claxton, Andrew R., David T. Wong, Frances Chung, & Michael G. Fehlings. (1998). Predictors of hospital mortality and mechanical ventilation in patients with cervical spinal cord injury. Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d anesthésie. 45(2). 144–149. 111 indexed citations

4.

Claxton, Andrew R., et al.. (1998). Predictors of Hospital Mortality and Mechanical Ventilation in Patients with Cervical Spinal Cord Injury. Survey of Anesthesiology. 42(6). 320???321–320???321. 5 indexed citations

5.

Claxton, Andrew R., Glenn McGuire, Frances Chung, & Charles Cruise. (1997). Evaluation of Morphine Versus Fentanyl for Postoperative Analgesia After Ambulatory Surgical Procedures. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 84(3). 509–514. 77 indexed citations

6.

Claxton, Andrew R., Glenn McGuire, Frances Chung, & Charles Cruise. (1997). Evaluation of Morphine Versus Fentanyl for Postoperative Analgesia After Ambulatory Surgical Procedures. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 84(3). 509–514. 35 indexed citations

7.

Claxton, Andrew R., et al.. (1997). Ambulatory anesthesia practices in the United Kingdom. Seminars in Anesthesia Perioperative Medicine and Pain. 16(3). 178–188. 1 indexed citations

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.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact