Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies
if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the
same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average
within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research
topics.
The Impact of Competition on Management Quality: Evidence from Public Hospitals
This map shows the geographic impact of Carol Propper'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 Carol Propper with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Carol Propper more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Carol Propper. 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 Carol Propper. The network helps show where Carol Propper may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Carol Propper
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Carol Propper.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Carol Propper 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 Carol Propper. Carol Propper is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Atkinson, Adèle, et al.. (2008). The Impact of Classroom Peer Groups on Pupil GCSE Results. Bristol Research (University of Bristol).15 indexed citations
8.
Janke, Katharina, et al.. (2007). Are Current Levels of Air Pollution in England Too High? The Impact of Pollution on Population Mortality. SSRN Electronic Journal.1 indexed citations
9.
Burgess, Simon, Carol Propper, & Deborah Wilson. (2005). Extending Choice In English Health Care: The implications of the economic evidence. SSRN Electronic Journal.20 indexed citations
Dixon, Jennifer, et al.. (2004). Mapping choice in the NHS: Analysis of routine data. Bristol Research (University of Bristol).1 indexed citations
13.
Burgess, Simon, et al.. (2003). Incentives in the Public Sector: Some Preliminary Evidence from a UK Government Agency. SSRN Electronic Journal.3 indexed citations
14.
Burgess, Simon, Karen Gardiner, & Carol Propper. (2002). The Economic Determinants of Truancy. London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science).4 indexed citations
15.
Propper, Carol. (2001). Expenditure on health care in the UK: A Review. Fiscal Studies. 151–184.2 indexed citations
16.
Gardiner, Karen, Stephen P. Jenkins, & Carol Propper. (2000). Measuring Income Risk. SSRN Electronic Journal.
17.
Grout, Paul A., et al.. (2000). Benchmarking and Incentives in the NHS. OpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique).8 indexed citations
18.
Propper, Carol. (1998). An Economic Model of Household Income Dynamics, with an Application to Poverty Dynamics among American Women. SSRN Electronic Journal.5 indexed citations
19.
Propper, Carol. (1995). The disutility of time spent on NHS waiting lists. Explore Bristol Research.6 indexed citations
20.
O’Donnell, Owen & Carol Propper. (1991). Reply: Equity and the Delivery of UK NHS Resources. Journal of Health Economics. 10. 247–249.4 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.