Ching Choi

657 total citations
10 papers, 375 citations indexed

About

Ching Choi is a scholar working on Health, General Health Professions and Sociology and Political Science. According to data from OpenAlex, Ching Choi has authored 10 papers receiving a total of 375 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 4 papers in Health, 3 papers in General Health Professions and 2 papers in Sociology and Political Science. Recurrent topics in Ching Choi's work include Health disparities and outcomes (3 papers), Migration, Aging, and Tourism Studies (2 papers) and Healthcare innovation and challenges (2 papers). Ching Choi is often cited by papers focused on Health disparities and outcomes (3 papers), Migration, Aging, and Tourism Studies (2 papers) and Healthcare innovation and challenges (2 papers). Ching Choi collaborates with scholars based in Australia. Ching Choi's co-authors include Penny Kane, Diane Gibson, John Goss, Hal Kendig, Geoff Davis, Richard E. Webb, Sushma Mathur, Jenny Hargreaves, Deborah Osborne and Richard C Rosewarne and has published in prestigious journals such as Social Science & Medicine, International Journal of Epidemiology and Disability and Rehabilitation.

In The Last Decade

Ching Choi

10 papers receiving 355 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Ching Choi Australia	6	139	78	75	63	60	10	375
Kristin Fox United States	8	213 1.5×	37 0.5×	124 1.7×	70 1.1×	70 1.2×	17	481
Alberto Palloni United States	8	128 0.9×	81 1.0×	188 2.5×	86 1.4×	79 1.3×	10	441
Valentine M. Villa United States	15	258 1.9×	48 0.6×	66 0.9×	45 0.7×	102 1.7×	27	475
Emily Rosenoff United States	8	232 1.7×	64 0.8×	47 0.6×	45 0.7×	52 0.9×	8	321
Maria das Graças Melo Fernandes Brazil	13	212 1.5×	73 0.9×	70 0.9×	57 0.9×	46 0.8×	46	398
Sushma Mathur Australia	7	172 1.2×	66 0.8×	62 0.8×	195 3.1×	43 0.7×	10	514
Gilbert Gimm United States	14	258 1.9×	76 1.0×	61 0.8×	54 0.9×	63 1.1×	58	500
Leila Mariza Hildebrandt Brazil	10	216 1.6×	85 1.1×	48 0.6×	104 1.7×	36 0.6×	89	418
Richard E. Webb Australia	4	115 0.8×	61 0.8×	53 0.7×	48 0.8×	37 0.6×	9	282
Tiffany Washington United States	11	224 1.6×	67 0.9×	89 1.2×	63 1.0×	88 1.5×	43	384

Countries citing papers authored by Ching Choi

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Ching Choi

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ching Choi. 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 Ching Choi. The network helps show where Ching Choi may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Ching Choi

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Ching Choi. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Ching Choi 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 Ching Choi. Ching Choi 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:

10 of 10 papers shown

1.

Choi, Ching, Paula Laws, Michelle Gourley, et al.. (2021). Value of a national burden-of-disease study: a comparison of estimates between the Australian Burden of Disease Study 2015 and the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. International Journal of Epidemiology. 51(2). 668–678. 8 indexed citations

2.

Choi, Ching & Len Smith. (2017). Record linkage to advance Indigenous mortality statistics in Australia – sources of error and bias. Statistical Journal of the IAOS. 34(2). 215–222. 1 indexed citations

3.

Al‐Yaman, Fadwa, et al.. (2017). Trends in Indigenous Mortality and Life Expectancy 2001-2015. ANU Open Research (Australian National University). 1 indexed citations

4.

Hull, Terence H. & Ching Choi. (2007). Book reviews. Journal of Population Research. 24(1). 133–139. 1 indexed citations

5.

Choi, Ching. (2007). Neonatal and Perinatal Mortality: Country, Regional and Global Estimates [Book Review]. 24(1). 136. 1 indexed citations

6.

Ruzicka, Lado T., et al.. (2005). Medical disorders of suicides in Australia: analysis using a multiple-cause-of-death approach. Social Science & Medicine. 61(2). 333–341. 21 indexed citations

7.

Madden, Ros, Ching Choi, & Catherine Sykes. (2003). The ICF as a framework for national data: the introduction of ICF into Australian data dictionaries. Disability and Rehabilitation. 25(11-12). 676–682. 25 indexed citations

8.

Kane, Penny & Ching Choi. (1999). China's one child family policy.. PubMed. 319(7215). 992–4. 50 indexed citations

9.

Choi, Ching, Geoff Davis, Diane Gibson, et al.. (1997). Older Australia at a glance. 259 indexed citations

10.

Gibson, Diane, et al.. (1995). The changing availability of residential aged care in Australia. Health Policy. 31(3). 211–224. 8 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