Craig G. Parker

479 total citations
12 papers, 287 citations indexed

About

Craig G. Parker is a scholar working on Molecular Biology, Health Information Management and Artificial Intelligence. According to data from OpenAlex, Craig G. Parker has authored 12 papers receiving a total of 287 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 9 papers in Molecular Biology, 6 papers in Health Information Management and 5 papers in Artificial Intelligence. Recurrent topics in Craig G. Parker's work include Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies (9 papers), Electronic Health Records Systems (6 papers) and Semantic Web and Ontologies (5 papers). Craig G. Parker is often cited by papers focused on Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies (9 papers), Electronic Health Records Systems (6 papers) and Semantic Web and Ontologies (5 papers). Craig G. Parker collaborates with scholars based in United States and United Kingdom. Craig G. Parker's co-authors include Stanley M. Huff, Thomas A. Oniki, Christopher G. Chute, Cui Tao, Jyotishman Pathak, Calvin E Beebe, Peter J. Haug, Guergana Savova, Susan Rea and David W. Embley and has published in prestigious journals such as Journal of Computational Chemistry, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association and Journal of Biomedical Informatics.

In The Last Decade

Craig G. Parker

10 papers receiving 270 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Craig G. Parker United States 8 147 118 113 61 34 12 287
Lewis J. Frey United States 11 113 0.8× 49 0.4× 117 1.0× 15 0.2× 14 0.4× 41 340
Diego Boscá Spain 8 131 0.9× 172 1.5× 115 1.0× 39 0.6× 69 2.0× 23 281
Georges J.E. De Moor Belgium 6 121 0.8× 102 0.9× 103 0.9× 55 0.9× 33 1.0× 15 301
Ergin Soysal United States 10 304 2.1× 52 0.4× 314 2.8× 27 0.4× 34 1.0× 15 513
Lawrence W. Wright United States 7 422 2.9× 30 0.3× 300 2.7× 25 0.4× 24 0.7× 15 523
David Moner Spain 10 183 1.2× 220 1.9× 143 1.3× 50 0.8× 92 2.7× 27 363
R.A. Rocha United States 9 315 2.1× 168 1.4× 256 2.3× 50 0.8× 35 1.0× 17 432
Sebastian Mate Germany 12 152 1.0× 147 1.2× 128 1.1× 79 1.3× 94 2.8× 26 374
Tonya Hongsermeier United States 11 150 1.0× 211 1.8× 106 0.9× 55 0.9× 52 1.5× 28 451
Katherine Hutchins United States 6 228 1.6× 151 1.3× 145 1.3× 63 1.0× 46 1.4× 7 392

Countries citing papers authored by Craig G. Parker

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Craig G. Parker

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Craig G. Parker. 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 Craig G. Parker. The network helps show where Craig G. Parker may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Craig G. Parker

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

All Works

12 of 12 papers shown
1.
Oniki, Thomas A., Calvin E Beebe, Hongfang Liu, et al.. (2015). Clinical element models in the SHARPn consortium. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 23(2). 248–256. 16 indexed citations
2.
Oniki, Thomas A., et al.. (2014). Lessons learned in detailed clinical modeling at Intermountain Healthcare. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 21(6). 1076–1081. 16 indexed citations
3.
Parker, Craig G., et al.. (2013). Teamwork in Implant Dentistry: The Provision of a Maxillary Implant Retained Overdenture. Primary Dental Journal. 2(2). 55–61. 1 indexed citations
4.
Oniki, Thomas A., et al.. (2012). Lessons Learned in Detailed Clinical Modeling at Intermountain Healthcare.. AMIA.
5.
Rea, Susan, Jyotishman Pathak, Guergana Savova, et al.. (2012). Building a robust, scalable and standards-driven infrastructure for secondary use of EHR data: The SHARPn project. Journal of Biomedical Informatics. 45(4). 763–771. 144 indexed citations
6.
Tao, Cui, Craig G. Parker, Thomas A. Oniki, et al.. (2011). An OWL meta-ontology for representing the Clinical Element Model.. PubMed. 2011. 1372–81. 12 indexed citations
7.
Lonsdale, Deryle, et al.. (2007). Assessing clinical trial eligibility with logic expression queries. Data & Knowledge Engineering. 66(1). 3–17. 21 indexed citations
8.
McClay, James C., et al.. (2006). Structuring order sets for interoperable distribution.. PubMed. 549–53. 5 indexed citations
9.
Parker, Craig G.. (2005). Generating Medical Logic Modules for Clinical Trial Eligibility. ScholarsArchive (Brigham Young University). 2 indexed citations
10.
Parker, Craig G., Roberto A. Rocha, James R. Campbell, Samson W. Tu, & Stanley M. Huff. (2004). Detailed clinical models for sharable, executable guidelines.. PubMed. 107(Pt 1). 145–8. 34 indexed citations
11.
Parker, Craig G. & David W. Embley. (2003). Generating medical logic modules for clinical trial eligibility criteria.. PubMed. 964–964. 10 indexed citations
12.
Parker, Craig G., et al.. (1996). Enantioselective binding of α-pinene and of some cyclohexanetriol derivatives by cyclodextrin hosts: A molecular modeling study. Journal of Computational Chemistry. 17(8). 931–939. 26 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

Rankless by CCL
2026