David Greenfield

4.1k total citations · 1 hit paper
121 papers, 2.6k citations indexed

About

David Greenfield is a scholar working on Oncology, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health and Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health. According to data from OpenAlex, David Greenfield has authored 121 papers receiving a total of 2.6k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 43 papers in Oncology, 39 papers in Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health and 32 papers in Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health. Recurrent topics in David Greenfield's work include Cancer survivorship and care (28 papers), Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life (27 papers) and Healthcare Quality and Management (17 papers). David Greenfield is often cited by papers focused on Cancer survivorship and care (28 papers), Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life (27 papers) and Healthcare Quality and Management (17 papers). David Greenfield collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, Australia and United States. David Greenfield's co-authors include Richard Eastell, Judith Anson, John A. Snowden, Tanya Lawlis, Christine Eiser, Jeffrey Braithwaite, Richard Ross, R.A. Hannon, Kate Absolom and Barry W. Hancock and has published in prestigious journals such as SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, PLoS ONE and Advanced Functional Materials.

In The Last Decade

David Greenfield

116 papers receiving 2.5k citations

Hit Papers

align trajectories

What are hit papers?

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.

Impact of large language model (ChatGPT) in healthcare: an umbrella review and evidence synthesis

2025 21 citations David Greenfield et al. profile →

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
David Greenfield United Kingdom	28	742	706	589	547	286	121	2.6k
June Carroll Canada	35	1.0k 1.4×	550 0.8×	672 1.1×	1.0k 1.8×	181 0.6×	146	3.6k
Feng Xie Canada	34	352 0.5×	470 0.7×	725 1.2×	158 0.3×	217 0.8×	241	4.4k
Kim Cocks United Kingdom	31	362 0.5×	1.9k 2.7×	299 0.5×	384 0.7×	115 0.4×	112	3.7k
Richard Feltbower United Kingdom	35	906 1.2×	611 0.9×	255 0.4×	1.0k 1.9×	290 1.0×	203	4.1k
Tanja Stamm Austria	49	403 0.5×	311 0.4×	615 1.0×	159 0.3×	317 1.1×	298	8.5k
Andrew Hutchings United Kingdom	40	468 0.6×	340 0.5×	922 1.6×	133 0.2×	226 0.8×	133	5.4k
Jason D. Pole Canada	30	921 1.2×	439 0.6×	445 0.8×	1.0k 1.9×	333 1.2×	167	3.1k
Mireia Espallargues Spain	26	407 0.5×	299 0.4×	751 1.3×	248 0.5×	160 0.6×	128	2.9k
Marilyn M. Schapira United States	35	589 0.8×	1.2k 1.7×	1.4k 2.4×	224 0.4×	286 1.0×	157	3.7k
Alison Reid Australia	35	699 0.9×	324 0.5×	913 1.6×	252 0.5×	343 1.2×	175	4.2k

Countries citing papers authored by David Greenfield

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by David Greenfield

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of David Greenfield

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

20 of 20 papers shown

Miller, Laura, Vanessa Halliday, John A. Snowden, et al.. (2024). Health professional attitudes and perceptions of prehabilitation and nutrition before haematopoietic cell transplantation. Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics. 37(4). 1007–1021. 3 indexed citations

Danson, Sarah, et al.. (2024). CN64 Three-year evaluation of an immunotherapy late effects screening clinic. Annals of Oncology. 35. S1188–S1188. 1 indexed citations

Lally, Phillippa, Fiona Kennedy, Susan Smith, et al.. (2024). The feasibility and acceptability of an app‐based intervention with brief behavioural support (APPROACH) to promote brisk walking in people diagnosed with breast, prostate and colorectal cancer in the UK. Cancer Medicine. 13(6). e7124–e7124. 3 indexed citations

Eeltink, Corien, Jacqui Stringer, Paul Bosman, et al.. (2022). Sexual function of adult long-term survivors and their partners after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in Europe (S-FAST): a study from the Transplant Complications Working Party and Nurses Group of the EBMT. Bone Marrow Transplantation. 58(2). 195–202. 4 indexed citations

Kabir, Russell, et al.. (2021). Should healthcare organisations offer ongoing rehabilitation services for patients undergoing haematopoietic cell transplant? A narrative review. International Journal of Health Governance. 26(2). 114–134.

Hogden, Anne, et al.. (2019). How Do Interprofessional Healthcare Teams Perceive the Benefits and Challenges of Interdisciplinary Ward Rounds. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología. 1 indexed citations

Retzer, Ameeta, Thomas Keeley, Khaled Ahmed, et al.. (2018). Evaluation of patient-reported outcome protocol content and reporting in UK cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study qualitative protocol. BMJ Open. 8(2). e017282–e017282. 7 indexed citations

Vogt, Katharina Sophie, Jane Hughes, Anna Wilkinson, et al.. (2018). Preserving fertility in women with cancer (PreFer): Decision‐making and patient‐reported outcomes in women offered egg and embryo freezing prior to cancer treatment. Psycho-Oncology. 27(12). 2725–2732. 13 indexed citations

Dahm, Maria R., Andrew Georgiou, Robert Herkes, et al.. (2018). Patient groups, clinicians and healthcare professionals agree – all test results need to be seen, understood and followed up. Diagnosis. 5(4). 215–222. 9 indexed citations

10.

Handforth, Catherine, Roger Burkinshaw, Jenny Freeman, et al.. (2018). Comprehensive geriatric assessment and decision-making in older men with incurable but manageable (chronic) cancer. Supportive Care in Cancer. 27(5). 1755–1763. 15 indexed citations

11.

Skilbeck, Julie, Helen J. Ross, Karen Collins, et al.. (2018). Is it feasible to conduct a randomised controlled trial of pretransplant exercise (prehabilitation) for patients with multiple myeloma awaiting autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation? Protocol for the PREeMPT study. BMJ Open. 8(3). e021333–e021333. 9 indexed citations

12.

Debono, Deborah, David Greenfield, Luke Testa, et al.. (2017). Understanding stakeholders’ perspectives and experiences of general practice accreditation. Health Policy. 121(7). 816–822. 15 indexed citations

13.

Jones, Georgina, Jane Hughes, Neda Mahmoodi, et al.. (2017). Observational study of the development and evaluation of a fertility preservation patient decision aid for teenage and adult women diagnosed with cancer: the Cancer, Fertility and Me research protocol. BMJ Open. 7(3). e013219–e013219. 27 indexed citations

14.

Ahmed, Khaled, Derek Kyte, Thomas Keeley, et al.. (2016). Systematic evaluation of patient-reported outcome (PRO) protocol content and reporting in UK cancer clinical trials: the EPiC study protocol. BMJ Open. 6(9). e012863–e012863. 16 indexed citations

15.

Mumford, Virginia, David Greenfield, Anne Hogden, et al.. (2015). Counting the costs of accreditation in acute care: an activity-based costing approach. BMJ Open. 5(9). e008850–e008850. 26 indexed citations

16.

Greenfield, David, Elaine Boland, Richard Ross, et al.. (2014). Endocrine, metabolic, nutritional and body composition abnormalities are common in advanced intensively-treated (transplanted) multiple myeloma. Bone Marrow Transplantation. 49(7). 907–912. 28 indexed citations

17.

Short, Alison, Rebecca Phillips, Peter Nugus, Paul Dugdale, & David Greenfield. (2014). Developing an inter-organizational community-based health network: an Australian investigation. Health Promotion International. 30(4). 868–880. 9 indexed citations

18.

Greenfield, David, Marjorie Pawsey, & Jeffrey Braithwaite. (2013). Accreditation: a global regulatory mechanism to promote quality and safety. eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania). 10 indexed citations

19.

Hogden, Anne, David Greenfield, Peter Nugus, & Matthew C. Kiernan. (2013). Development of a model to guide decision making in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis multidisciplinary care. Health Expectations. 18(5). 1769–1782. 34 indexed citations

20.

Akid, R., et al.. (2010). Biotic sol-gel coating for the inhibition of marine corrosion and biofouling. Research Explorer (The University of Manchester). 88(21). 21–23. 2 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