Emma Reble

413 total citations
9 papers, 75 citations indexed

About

Emma Reble is a scholar working on Genetics, Pathology and Forensic Medicine and Molecular Biology. According to data from OpenAlex, Emma Reble has authored 9 papers receiving a total of 75 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 7 papers in Genetics, 3 papers in Pathology and Forensic Medicine and 2 papers in Molecular Biology. Recurrent topics in Emma Reble's work include Genomics and Rare Diseases (6 papers), BRCA gene mutations in cancer (4 papers) and Genetic factors in colorectal cancer (3 papers). Emma Reble is often cited by papers focused on Genomics and Rare Diseases (6 papers), BRCA gene mutations in cancer (4 papers) and Genetic factors in colorectal cancer (3 papers). Emma Reble collaborates with scholars based in Canada, Australia and United Kingdom. Emma Reble's co-authors include Cathy L. Barr, Shiva M. Singh, Richard O’Reilly, Christina A. Castellani, Melkaye G. Melka, Raymond H. Kim, Marc Clausen, Jordan Lerner‐Ellis, Yvonne Bombard and Chloe Mighton and has published in prestigious journals such as SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, Human Genetics and Genetics in Medicine.

In The Last Decade

Emma Reble

7 papers receiving 75 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Emma Reble Canada	5	35	31	19	10	9	9	75
Catrina M. Loucks Canada	6	36 1.0×	64 2.1×	6 0.3×	8 0.8×	10 1.1×	18	113
Aina Jené Spain	3	31 0.9×	41 1.3×	14 0.7×	10 1.0×	7 0.8×	4	80
Daniela Russo Italy	5	16 0.5×	20 0.6×	19 1.0×	4 0.4×	23 2.6×	10	96
Giulia Salvadori Italy	4	12 0.3×	51 1.6×	32 1.7×	10 1.0×	19 2.1×	4	138
Kimberly Foss United States	7	83 2.4×	54 1.7×	13 0.7×	22 2.2×	7 0.8×	11	139
Meghan Acres United Kingdom	4	33 0.9×	25 0.8×	7 0.4×	2 0.2×	12 1.3×	5	98
Alex Hastie United States	5	22 0.6×	34 1.1×	20 1.1×	5 0.5×	6 0.7×	13	63
Nella Junna Finland	4	49 1.4×	42 1.4×	9 0.5×	14 1.4×	4 0.4×	6	130
Sonja Helbig Germany	3	32 0.9×	41 1.3×	17 0.9×	4 0.4×	24 2.7×	4	78
Stasa Stankovic United Kingdom	5	38 1.1×	53 1.7×	8 0.4×	22 2.2×	6 0.7×	6	113

Countries citing papers authored by Emma Reble

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Emma Reble

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Emma Reble

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

9 of 9 papers shown

1.

Shickh, Salma, Chloe Mighton, Marc Clausen, et al.. (2023). P409: Clinical utility of genomic sequencing for hereditary cancer syndromes: An observational chart review. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología. 1(1). 100445–100445.

2.

Reble, Emma, Marc Clausen, Salma Shickh, et al.. (2023). P543: Comparing the analytical performance of exome sequencing and traditional panel testing in a cancer population. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología. 1(1). 100590–100590.

3.

Shickh, Salma, Chloe Mighton, Marc Clausen, et al.. (2022). “Doctors shouldn’t have to cheat the system”: Clinicians’ real-world experiences of the utility of genomic sequencing. Genetics in Medicine. 24(9). 1888–1898. 2 indexed citations

4.

Carroll, June, Meredith Vanstone, Marc Clausen, et al.. (2021). Widening the lens of actionability: A qualitative study of primary care providers’ views and experiences of managing secondary genomic findings. European Journal of Human Genetics. 30(5). 595–603. 7 indexed citations

5.

Carroll, June, Meredith Vanstone, Marc Clausen, et al.. (2021). Challenges and practical solutions for managing secondary genomic findings in primary care. European Journal of Medical Genetics. 65(1). 104384–104384. 4 indexed citations

6.

Reble, Emma, Sam Khalouei, Marc Clausen, et al.. (2020). Beyond medically actionable results: an analytical pipeline for decreasing the burden of returning all clinically significant secondary findings. Human Genetics. 140(3). 493–504. 11 indexed citations

7.

Reble, Emma, Yu Feng, Karen Wigg, & Cathy L. Barr. (2019). DNA Variant in the RPGRIP1L Gene Influences Alternative Splicing. PubMed. 5(Suppl. 1). 97–106. 4 indexed citations

8.

Reble, Emma, Christina A. Castellani, Melkaye G. Melka, Richard O’Reilly, & Shiva M. Singh. (2017). VarScan2 analysis of de novo variants in monozygotic twins discordant for schizophrenia. Psychiatric Genetics. 27(2). 62–70. 19 indexed citations

9.

Reble, Emma, et al.. (2017). The contribution of alternative splicing to genetic risk for psychiatric disorders. Genes Brain & Behavior. 17(3). e12430–e12430. 28 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