Denitza Williams

805 total citations · 1 hit paper
24 papers, 481 citations indexed

About

Denitza Williams is a scholar working on General Health Professions, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health and Sociology and Political Science. According to data from OpenAlex, Denitza Williams has authored 24 papers receiving a total of 481 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 13 papers in General Health Professions, 9 papers in Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health and 5 papers in Sociology and Political Science. Recurrent topics in Denitza Williams's work include Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare (8 papers), Pregnancy and Medication Impact (6 papers) and Cervical Cancer and HPV Research (3 papers). Denitza Williams is often cited by papers focused on Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare (8 papers), Pregnancy and Medication Impact (6 papers) and Cervical Cancer and HPV Research (3 papers). Denitza Williams collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, Australia and Qatar. Denitza Williams's co-authors include Rhiannon Phillips, Britt Hallingberg, Wouter Poortinga, Natalie Joseph‐Williams, Adrian Edwards, Aimee Grant, Fiona Wood, Julia Sanders, Helen Sweetland and Ernest Choy and has published in prestigious journals such as PLoS ONE, Landscape and Urban Planning and Journal of Advanced Nursing.

In The Last Decade

Denitza Williams

24 papers receiving 472 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.

The role of perceived public and private green space in subjective health and wellbeing during and after the first peak of the COVID-19 outbreak

2021 199 citations Wouter Poortinga, Britt Hallingberg et al. Landscape and Urban Planning profile →

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Denitza Williams United Kingdom	11	159	125	98	96	86	24	481
Hannah Cohen‐Cline United States	11	236 1.5×	109 0.9×	69 0.7×	57 0.6×	70 0.8×	23	538
Annemarie Ruijsbroek Netherlands	12	411 2.6×	108 0.9×	58 0.6×	99 1.0×	98 1.1×	21	687
Carmen Stokes United States	8	130 0.8×	233 1.9×	187 1.9×	167 1.7×	39 0.5×	13	800
Malo Hutson United States	8	175 1.1×	93 0.7×	57 0.6×	118 1.2×	52 0.6×	14	427
Mark Cherrie United Kingdom	16	370 2.3×	107 0.9×	41 0.4×	54 0.6×	74 0.9×	36	711
Peter Fernando Australia	12	100 0.6×	95 0.8×	44 0.4×	44 0.5×	54 0.6×	16	394
Ramya Chari United States	11	64 0.4×	177 1.4×	38 0.4×	105 1.1×	23 0.3×	37	540
Berta Suárez Spain	7	134 0.8×	104 0.8×	90 0.9×	63 0.7×	14 0.2×	9	688
Cláudia Costa Portugal	12	113 0.7×	246 2.0×	74 0.8×	55 0.6×	27 0.3×	42	563
Sharrelle Barber United States	16	114 0.7×	228 1.8×	120 1.2×	134 1.4×	27 0.3×	35	724

Countries citing papers authored by Denitza Williams

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Denitza Williams

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Denitza Williams

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Denitza Williams. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Denitza Williams 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 Denitza Williams. Denitza Williams 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

Williams, Denitza, Kate Lifford, Fiona Wood, et al.. (2025). Recommendations for a Communication Strategy to Support Informed Decision‐Making About Self or Clinician Sampling for Cervical Screening in the UK: Qualitative Study. Health Expectations. 28(2). e70191–e70191. 1 indexed citations

Cooper, Alison, Ruth Lewis, Micaela Gal, et al.. (2024). Informing evidence-based policy during the COVID-19 pandemic and recovery period: learning from a national evidence centre. Global Health Research and Policy. 9(1). 18–18. 3 indexed citations

Williams, Denitza, et al.. (2024). Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on people experiencing incarceration: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 14(4). e076451–e076451. 3 indexed citations

Lifford, Kate, et al.. (2024). Identifying optimum implementation for human papillomavirus self-sampling in underserved communities: A systematic review. Journal of Medical Screening. 32(1). 2–18. 1 indexed citations

Williams, Denitza, et al.. (2024). Interventions to mitigate the risks of COVID-19 for people experiencing homelessness and their effectiveness: a systematic review. Frontiers in Public Health. 11. 1286730–1286730. 1 indexed citations

Williams, Denitza, Daniela K Schlüter, David Taylor‐Robinson, et al.. (2023). Sharing decisions on reproductive goals: A mixed-methods study of the views of women who have cystic fibrosis. Journal of Cystic Fibrosis. 22(2). 207–216. 4 indexed citations

Williams, Denitza, et al.. (2023). The Impact of Being Homeless on the Clinical Outcomes of COVID-19: Systematic Review. International Journal of Public Health. 68. 1605893–1605893. 5 indexed citations

Noyes, Jane, Judith Stone, Helen Williams, et al.. (2023). Feminizing care pathways: Mixed‐methods study of reproductive options, decision making, pregnancy, post‐natal care and parenting amongst women with kidney disease. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 79(8). 3127–3146. 4 indexed citations

Phillips, Rhiannon, David Gillespie, Britt Hallingberg, et al.. (2022). Perceived threat of COVID-19, attitudes towards vaccination, and vaccine hesitancy: A prospective longitudinal study in the UK. Figshare. 2 indexed citations

10.

Williams, Denitza, Aimee Grant, Julia Sanders, et al.. (2022). Identities of women who have an autoimmune rheumatic disease [ARD] during pregnancy planning, pregnancy and early parenting: A qualitative study. PLoS ONE. 17(11). e0263910–e0263910. 1 indexed citations

11.

Grant, Aimee, Lauren Copeland, Amy Brown, et al.. (2022). Views and experience of breastfeeding in public: A qualitative systematic review. Maternal and Child Nutrition. 18(4). e13407–e13407. 24 indexed citations

12.

Phillips, Rhiannon, et al.. (2021). Engaging and supporting women with chronic kidney disease with pre‐conception decision‐making (including their experiences during COVID 19): A mixed‐methods study protocol. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 77(6). 2887–2897. 2 indexed citations

13.

Williams, Denitza, et al.. (2021). Barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making in neonatal medicine: A systematic review and thematic synthesis of parental perceptions. Patient Education and Counseling. 105(5). 1101–1114. 24 indexed citations

14.

Poortinga, Wouter, et al.. (2021). The role of perceived public and private green space in subjective health and wellbeing during and after the first peak of the COVID-19 outbreak. Landscape and Urban Planning. 211. 104092–104092. 199 indexed citations breakdown →

15.

Williams, Denitza, Adrian Edwards, Fiona Wood, et al.. (2019). Ability of observer and self-report measures to capture shared decision-making in clinical practice in the UK: a mixed-methods study. BMJ Open. 9(8). e029485–e029485. 21 indexed citations

16.

Joseph‐Williams, Natalie, Denitza Williams, Fiona Wood, et al.. (2019). A descriptive model of shared decision making derived from routine implementation in clinical practice (‘Implement-SDM’): Qualitative study. Patient Education and Counseling. 102(10). 1774–1785. 50 indexed citations

17.

Williams, Denitza, Jessica Webber, Aimee Grant, et al.. (2019). “Nobody knows, or seems to know how rheumatology and breastfeeding works”: Women's experiences of breastfeeding whilst managing a long-term limiting condition – A qualitative visual methods study. Midwifery. 78. 91–96. 19 indexed citations

18.

Gobat, Nina, Lauren Copeland, Rebecca Cannings‐John, et al.. (2018). “Focusing” in Motivational Interviewing: development of a training tool for practitioners. European Journal for Person Centered Healthcare. 6(1). 37–37. 2 indexed citations

19.

Phillips, Rhiannon, Aimee Grant, Julia Sanders, et al.. (2018). Identifying the unmet information and support needs of women with autoimmune rheumatic diseases during pregnancy planning, pregnancy and early parenting: mixed-methods study. BMC Rheumatology. 2(1). 21–21. 35 indexed citations

20.

Williams, Denitza, et al.. (2017). Women's perspectives on human papillomavirus self‐sampling in the context of the UK cervical screening programme. Health Expectations. 20(5). 1031–1040. 23 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