Célia Primus-de Jong
- Neurology top 5%
- Infectious Diseases top 10%
- Clinical Psychology top 10%
- Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine top 5%
- Psychiatry and Mental health
- Co-authors
- Koen Van den HeedeMarie DauvrinCharline Maertens de NoordhoutIrina CleemputLaurence KohnDiego Castanares‐ZapateroJens DetollenaerePatrice Chalon
- Topics
- Long-Term Effects of COVID-19 (3 papers)Thermal Regulation in Medicine (2 papers)Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (2 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesBelgiumIreland
In The Last Decade
Célia Primus-de Jong
6 papers receiving 369 citations
Hit Papers
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 66
- Neurology 312
- Infectious Diseases 144
- Clinical Psychology 123
- Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine 75
- Psychiatry and Mental health 58
Countries citing papers authored by Célia Primus-de Jong
This map shows the geographic impact of Célia Primus-de Jong'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 Célia Primus-de Jong with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Célia Primus-de Jong more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Célia Primus-de Jong
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Célia Primus-de Jong. 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 Célia Primus-de Jong. The network helps show where Célia Primus-de Jong may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Célia Primus-de Jong
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Célia Primus-de Jong. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Célia Primus-de Jong 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 Célia Primus-de Jong. Célia Primus-de Jong is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | |
| 2 | 0 | |
| 3 | 9 | |
| 4 | 0 | |
| 5 | Pathophysiology and mechanism of long COVID: a comprehensive reviewbreakdown → | 339 |
| 6 | 28 | |
| 7 | 1 | |
| 8 | 1 | |
| 9 | 0 | |
| 10 | 0 | |
| 11 | 0 |
About Célia Primus-de Jong
Célia Primus-de Jong is a scholar working on Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Pharmacy and Neurology, having authored 11 papers that have together received 379 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Long-Term Effects of COVID-19 (3 papers), Thermal Regulation in Medicine (2 papers) and Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Neurology (312 citations), Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine (75 citations) and Infectious Diseases (144 citations). Célia Primus-de Jong has collaborated with scholars based in United States, Belgium and Ireland. Frequent co-authors include Koen Van den Heede, Marie Dauvrin, Charline Maertens de Noordhout, Irina Cleemput, Laurence Kohn, Diego Castanares‐Zapatero, Jens Detollenaere, Patrice Chalon, Frank Hulstaert and Mattias Neyt. Their work appears in journals such as Annals of Medicine, Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases and Occupational Medicine.
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.