Gayle Greene
- Literature and Literary Theory top 2%
- Sociology and Political Science
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
- General Health Professions
- Rehabilitation top 10%
- Co-authors
- Edward D. LemaireCarol Thomas NeelyCoppélia KahnDebra SladeVicki RatnerRebecca O’RourkeTony DaviesJanet Batsleer
- Topics
- Healthcare Systems and Technology (5 papers)Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation (5 papers)Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism (5 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesCanadaSri Lanka
In The Last Decade
Gayle Greene
34 papers receiving 332 citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 101
- Literature and Literary Theory 145
- Sociology and Political Science 113
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health 87
- General Health Professions 53
- Rehabilitation 41
Countries citing papers authored by Gayle Greene
This map shows the geographic impact of Gayle Greene'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 Gayle Greene with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Gayle Greene more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Gayle Greene
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Gayle Greene. 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 Gayle Greene. The network helps show where Gayle Greene may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Gayle Greene
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Gayle Greene. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Gayle Greene 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 Gayle Greene. Gayle Greene is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
All Works
| # | Work | Indexed citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | |
| 2 | 1 | |
| 3 | 5 | |
| 4 | 75 | |
| 5 | 4 | |
| 6 | 15 | |
| 7 | 11 | |
| 8 | 17 | |
| 9 | 1 | |
| 10 | 1 | |
| 11 | 7 | |
| 12 | 1 | |
| 13 | 1 | |
| 14 | 37 | |
| 15 | Daughters of the Revolution | 0 |
| 16 | 2 | |
| 17 | 96 | |
| 18 | 1 | |
| 19 | 4 | |
| 20 | 63 |
About Gayle Greene
Gayle Greene is a scholar working on Literature and Literary Theory, Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management and Visual Arts and Performing Arts, having authored 50 papers that have together received 517 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Healthcare Systems and Technology (5 papers), Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation (5 papers) and Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism (5 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Literature and Literary Theory (145 citations), Occupational Therapy (28 citations) and Rehabilitation (41 citations). Gayle Greene has collaborated with scholars based in United States, Canada and Sri Lanka. Frequent co-authors include Edward D. Lemaire, Carol Thomas Neely, Coppélia Kahn, Debra Slade, Vicki Ratner, Rebecca O’Rourke, Tony Davies, Janet Batsleer, Chris Weedon and Charlotte Hogsett. Their work appears in journals such as Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Disability and Rehabilitation and Signs.
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.