Clive E. Hyde
Impact in
- Family Practice top 5%
- Toxicology top 5%
- Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
Papers in
-
- Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills 2
- Co-authors
- E. B. FaragherChris SimpsonDouglas BlackPhilip RoeDavid P. GoldbergPeter MaguireSimon JonesDavid Goldberg
- Journals
- The British Journal of Psychiatry (7 papers)Psychological Medicine (2 papers)Journal of Psychosomatic Research (1 paper)Leisure Studies (1 paper)Medical Education (1 paper)
- Partner nations
- United KingdomUnited StatesAustralia
In The Last Decade
Clive E. Hyde
22 papers receiving 486 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 81
- Family Practice 46
- Toxicology 58
- Psychiatry and Mental health 196
- Clinical Psychology 259
- Medical Terminology 2
Countries citing papers authored by Clive E. Hyde
This map shows the geographic impact of Clive E. Hyde'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 Clive E. Hyde with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Clive E. Hyde more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Clive E. Hyde
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Clive E. Hyde. 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 Clive E. Hyde. The network helps show where Clive E. Hyde may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network
The 23 scholars most cited alongside Clive E. Hyde, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.
All Works
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2024 | 0 | |
| 2 | 2024 | 1 | |
| 3 | 2012 | 14 | |
| 4 | 2011 | 1 | |
| 5 | 2000 | 2 | |
| 6 | 1998 | 19 | |
| 7 | The computer age impacts nurses. | 1997 | 7 |
| 8 | 1996 | 17 | |
| 9 | 1995 | 9 | |
| 10 | 1993 | 6 | |
| 11 | 1992 | 5 | |
| 12 | 1991 | 80 | |
| 13 | 1991 | 6 | |
| 14 | 1989 | 89 | |
| 15 | 1987 | 53 | |
| 16 | 1983 | 2 | |
| 17 | 1979 | 5 | |
| 18 | 1978 | 144 | |
| 19 | 1978 | 30 | |
| 20 | 1977 | 23 |
About Clive E. Hyde
Clive E. Hyde is a scholar working on Family Practice, Issues, ethics and legal aspects, Psychiatry and Mental health, Clinical Psychology and Philosophy, having authored 23 papers that have together received 553 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Schizophrenia research and treatment (7 papers), Psychiatric care and mental health services (5 papers), Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints (5 papers), Mental Health and Psychiatry (4 papers), Mental Health Treatment and Access (2 papers), Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills (2 papers), Psychedelics and Drug Studies (2 papers) and Innovations in Medical Education (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Family Practice (46 citations), Toxicology (58 citations), Psychiatry and Mental health (196 citations), Clinical Psychology (259 citations) and Medical Terminology (2 citations). Clive E. Hyde has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and Australia. Frequent co-authors include E. B. Faragher, Chris Simpson, Douglas Black, Philip Roe, David P. Goldberg, Peter Maguire, Simon Jones, David Goldberg, K. Bridges and J. C. Kenna. Their work appears in journals such as The British Journal of Psychiatry, Psychological Medicine, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Leisure Studies and Medical Education.
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.