Citations per year, relative to Ha T Tu Ha T Tu (= 1×)
peers
Alyssa L. Holmgren
Countries citing papers authored by Ha T Tu
Since
Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Ha T Tu'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 Ha T Tu with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ha T Tu more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ha T Tu. 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 Ha T Tu. The network helps show where Ha T Tu may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Ha T Tu
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Ha T Tu.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Ha T Tu 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 Ha T Tu. Ha T Tu is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Tu, Ha T. (2011). Surprising decline in consumers seeking health information.. PubMed. 1–6.19 indexed citations
3.
Tu, Ha T, et al.. (2011). Employer-sponsored health insurance: down but not out.. PubMed. 1–5.3 indexed citations
4.
Felland, Laurie, Joy M. Grossman, & Ha T Tu. (2011). Key findings from HSC's 2010 site visits: health care markets weather economic downturn, brace for health reform.. PubMed. 1–8.8 indexed citations
5.
Tu, Ha T, Ellyn R Boukus, & Genna R. Cohen. (2010). Workplace clinics: a sign of growing employer interest in wellness.. PubMed. 1–16.19 indexed citations
6.
Tu, Ha T, et al.. (2009). Designing effective health care quality transparency initiatives.. PubMed. 1–6.5 indexed citations
7.
Tu, Ha T, et al.. (2008). Word of mouth and physician referrals still drive health care provider choice.. PubMed. 1–8.58 indexed citations
8.
Tu, Ha T & Genna R. Cohen. (2008). Striking jump in consumers seeking health care information.. PubMed. 1–8.77 indexed citations
9.
Tu, Ha T & Catherine Corey. (2008). State prescription drug price Web sites: how useful to consumers?. PubMed. 1–16.3 indexed citations
10.
Tu, Ha T & Ann S. O’Malley. (2007). Exodus of male physicians from primary care drives shift to specialty practice.. PubMed. 1–6.14 indexed citations
Tu, Ha T & Paul Β. Ginsburg. (2007). Benefit design innovations: implications for consumer-directed health care.. PubMed. 1–6.7 indexed citations
13.
Tu, Ha T & Paul Β. Ginsburg. (2006). Losing ground: physician income, 1995-2003.. PubMed. 1–8.34 indexed citations
14.
Tu, Ha T & Peter Cunningham. (2005). Public coverage provides vital safety net for children with special health care needs.. PubMed. 1–7.8 indexed citations
15.
Tu, Ha T. (2005). More Americans willing to limit physician-hospital choice for lower medical costs.. PubMed. 1–5.3 indexed citations
16.
Reed, Marie & Ha T Tu. (2002). Triple jeopardy: low income, chronically ill and uninsured in America.. PubMed. 1–4.16 indexed citations
Reschovsky, James D., Peter Kemper, & Ha T Tu. (2000). Does type of health insurance affect health care use and assessments of care among the privately insured?. PubMed. 35(1 Pt 2). 219–37.35 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.