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.
EFSUMB Guidelines and Recommendations on the Clinical Use of Liver Ultrasound Elastography, Update 2017 (Long Version)
2017742 citationsJeffrey C. Bamber, David O. Cosgrove et al.profile →
Shear-wave Elastography Improves the Specificity of Breast US: The BE1 Multinational Study of 939 Masses
2012637 citationsDavid O. Cosgrove et al.Radiologyprofile →
Clinical validation of a targeted methylation-based multi-cancer early detection test using an independent validation set
2021520 citationsEric A. Klein, Donald Richards et al.Annals of Oncologyprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
Countries citing papers authored by David O. Cosgrove
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of David O. Cosgrove'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 O. Cosgrove with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites David O. Cosgrove more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by David O. Cosgrove
This network shows the impact of papers produced by David O. Cosgrove. 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 O. Cosgrove. The network helps show where David O. Cosgrove may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of David O. Cosgrove
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of David O. Cosgrove.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of David O. Cosgrove 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 O. Cosgrove. David O. Cosgrove is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Klein, Eric A., Donald Richards, Allen Lee Cohn, et al.. (2021). Clinical validation of a targeted methylation-based multi-cancer early detection test using an independent validation set. Annals of Oncology. 32(9). 1167–1177.520 indexed citations breakdown →
Bamber, Jeffrey C., Paul E. Barbone, Nigel L. Bush, et al.. (2002). Progress in Freehand Elastography of the Breast. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems. 85(1). 5–14.29 indexed citations
15.
Dewbury, K. C., Hylton B. Meire, David O. Cosgrove, & P. Farrant. (2001). Ultrasound in obstetrics and gynaecology. Churchill Livingstone eBooks.16 indexed citations
16.
Bamber, Jeffrey C., Robert J. Eckersley, & David O. Cosgrove. (1994). 3-D reconstruction of combined colour Doppler and grey scale images of breast tumours. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology.1 indexed citations
17.
Cosgrove, David O., Hylton B. Meire, & K. C. Dewbury. (1993). Abdominal and general ultrasound. Churchill Livingstone eBooks.92 indexed citations
Cosgrove, David O., et al.. (1983). Ultrasound in inflammatory disease. Churchill Livingstone eBooks.3 indexed citations
20.
Hill, Christopher, V. R. McCready, & David O. Cosgrove. (1978). Ultrasound in tumour diagnosis.9 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.