J Morcom

509 total citations
9 papers, 407 citations indexed

About

J Morcom is a scholar working on Oncology, Pathology and Forensic Medicine and Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine. According to data from OpenAlex, J Morcom has authored 9 papers receiving a total of 407 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 6 papers in Oncology, 3 papers in Pathology and Forensic Medicine and 3 papers in Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine. Recurrent topics in J Morcom's work include Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection (6 papers), Genetic factors in colorectal cancer (3 papers) and Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes (3 papers). J Morcom is often cited by papers focused on Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection (6 papers), Genetic factors in colorectal cancer (3 papers) and Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes (3 papers). J Morcom collaborates with scholars based in Australia. J Morcom's co-authors include Graeme P. Young, Stephen R. Cole, Josephine M. Guy, Adrian Esterman, Elizabeth Chow, Jayne Sandford, Joanne M. Lane, Peter A. Bampton, Norm Good and Ian Zajac and has published in prestigious journals such as Gastroenterology, Journal of Medical Screening and Gastroenterology Nursing.

In The Last Decade

J Morcom

9 papers receiving 400 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
J Morcom Australia	6	384	207	123	88	50	9	407
Thomas Riley United States	7	401 1.0×	287 1.4×	138 1.1×	84 1.0×	20 0.4×	10	490
Núria Milà Spain	12	267 0.7×	137 0.7×	70 0.6×	66 0.8×	34 0.7×	23	312
S. Lucas Goede Netherlands	9	344 0.9×	210 1.0×	120 1.0×	88 1.0×	22 0.4×	10	384
Dayna R. Cenin Australia	8	278 0.7×	142 0.7×	114 0.9×	75 0.9×	25 0.5×	16	347
E MacRae United Kingdom	5	259 0.7×	160 0.8×	96 0.8×	83 0.9×	20 0.4×	8	298
Aafke H C van Roon Netherlands	10	570 1.5×	374 1.8×	210 1.7×	218 2.5×	72 1.4×	12	624
Célia Berchi France	10	269 0.7×	137 0.7×	80 0.7×	66 0.8×	47 0.9×	23	369
Stefano Gasperoni Italy	5	273 0.7×	198 1.0×	119 1.0×	101 1.1×	21 0.4×	7	322
Séverine Schusselé Filliettaz Switzerland	9	197 0.5×	151 0.7×	63 0.5×	106 1.2×	41 0.8×	22	320
Claudia L. Seguin United States	6	193 0.5×	118 0.6×	83 0.7×	53 0.6×	17 0.3×	8	260

Countries citing papers authored by J Morcom

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by J Morcom

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of J Morcom

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

Lane, Joanne M., Elizabeth Chow, Graeme P. Young, et al.. (2010). Interval Fecal Immunochemical Testing in a Colonoscopic Surveillance Program Speeds Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 139(6). 1918–1926. 75 indexed citations

2.

Zajac, Ian, et al.. (2010). Endorsement by the Primary Care Practitioner Consistently Improves Participation in Screening for Colorectal Cancer: A Longitudinal Analysis. Journal of Medical Screening. 17(1). 19–24. 49 indexed citations

3.

Cole, Stephen R., et al.. (2010). S1149 Immunochemical Fecal Occult Blood Tests Detect Earlier Stage Colorectal Cancers. Gastroenterology. 138(5). S–190. 3 indexed citations

4.

Morcom, J, et al.. (2005). Establishing an Australian Nurse Practitioner-Led Colorectal Cancer Screening Clinic. Gastroenterology Nursing. 28(1). 33–42. 14 indexed citations

5.

Cole, Stephen R., et al.. (2003). A Randomised Trial of the Impact of New Faecal Haemoglobin Test Technologies on Population Participation in Screening for Colorectal Cancer. Journal of Medical Screening. 10(3). 117–122. 133 indexed citations

6.

Young, Graeme P., et al.. (2003). Prescreening Evaluation of a Brush-Based Faecal Immunochemical Test for Haemoglobin. Journal of Medical Screening. 10(3). 123–128. 18 indexed citations

7.

Bampton, Peter A., et al.. (2003). Screening for colorectal cancer: Direct comparison of a brush-sampling fecal immunochemical test for hemoglobin with hemoccult. Gastroenterology. 124(4). A80–A80. 4 indexed citations

8.

Cole, Stephen R., et al.. (2002). Participation in screening for colorectal cancer based on a faecal occult blood test is improved by endorsement by the primary care practitioner. Journal of Medical Screening. 9(4). 147–152. 110 indexed citations

9.

Ring, J, et al.. (2000). Lansoprazole but not ranitidine interferes with 13C Urea breath test detection of helicobacter pylori infection. Gastroenterology. 118(4). A1228–A1228. 1 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