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.
Maximum utilization of the life table method in analyzing survival
19582.5k citationsSidney J. Cutler, Fred EdererJournal of Chronic Diseasesprofile →
Reducing Mortality from Colorectal Cancer by Screening for Fecal Occult Blood
19932.5k citationsJack S. Mandel, John H. Bond et al.New England Journal of Medicineprofile →
The Effect of Fecal Occult-Blood Screening on the Incidence of Colorectal Cancer
20001.1k citationsJack S. Mandel, Timothy R. Church et al.New England Journal of Medicineprofile →
This map shows the geographic impact of Fred Ederer'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 Fred Ederer with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Fred Ederer more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Fred Ederer. 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 Fred Ederer. The network helps show where Fred Ederer may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Fred Ederer
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Fred Ederer.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Fred Ederer 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 Fred Ederer. Fred Ederer is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Mandel, Jack S., Timothy R. Church, John H. Bond, et al.. (2000). The Effect of Fecal Occult-Blood Screening on the Incidence of Colorectal Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. 343(22). 1603–1607.1066 indexed citations breakdown →
3.
Mandel, Jeffrey S., Timothy R. Church, Fred Ederer, & John H. Bond. (1999). Colorectal Cancer Mortality: Effectiveness of Biennial Screening for Fecal Occult Blood. JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 91(5). 434–437.605 indexed citations breakdown →
Mandel, Jack S., John H. Bond, Timothy R. Church, et al.. (1993). Reducing Mortality from Colorectal Cancer by Screening for Fecal Occult Blood. New England Journal of Medicine. 328(19). 1365–1371.2451 indexed citations breakdown →
9.
Church, Timothy R., Fred Ederer, Jack S. Mandel, Gavin D. Watt, & Mindy S. Geisser. (1993). Estimating the Duration of Ongoing Prevention Trials. American Journal of Epidemiology. 137(7). 797–810.12 indexed citations
Rand, Lawrence I., Gérald J. Prud’homme, Fred Ederer, & Paul L. Canner. (1985). Factors influencing the development of visual loss in advanced diabetic retinopathy. Diabetic Retinopathy Study (DRS) Report No. 10.. PubMed. 26(7). 983–91.59 indexed citations
Aiello, Lloyd M., Matthew D. Davis, Fred Ederer, et al.. (1974). The Diabetic Retinopathy Study-Reply. Archives of Ophthalmology. 92(2). 179–180.2 indexed citations
16.
Bailar, John C. & Fred Ederer. (1964). 202. Note: Significance Factors for the Ratio of a Poisson Variable to Its Expectation. Biometrics. 20(3). 639–639.553 indexed citations breakdown →
Cutler, Sidney J. & Fred Ederer. (1958). Maximum utilization of the life table method in analyzing survival. Journal of Chronic Diseases. 8(6). 699–712.2542 indexed citations breakdown →
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.