James Glancy

669 citations
11 papers · 509 indexed · h-index 7

Impact in

Papers in

James Glancy

10 papers receiving 485 citations

Peers

James Glancy
Comparison fields: 5 of 52
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine 475
  • Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging 70
  • Emergency Medicine 16
  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine 5
  • Molecular Biology 60
Replace Markus Zarse with:
Markus Zarse Germany
Paul G. Colavita United States
Michael Nürnberg Austria
Margarita Dorantes Sánchez Cuba
Diego Goldwasser Spain
François Brigadeau France
Miguel A. Quiñones Pérez Cuba
Yanela Fayad Rodríguez Cuba
Francisco Dorticós Balea Cuba
Soufian Almahameed United States
James Glancy relative to Markus Zarse Germany Markus Zarse's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×
Markus Zarse · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by James Glancy

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by James Glancy

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

The 21 scholars most cited alongside James Glancy, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with James Glancy Line = papers co-authored together James Glancy links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

11 of 11 papers shown
#Work
1 1995269
2 1996108
3 199647
4 201634
5 199520
6 199514
7 199713
8 20212
9 19951
10 20211
11 20210

About James Glancy

James Glancy is a scholar working on Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Biomedical Engineering, Infectious Diseases, Health Information Management and Oncology, having authored 11 papers that have together received 509 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias (7 papers), ECG Monitoring and Analysis (6 papers), Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies (5 papers), Analog and Mixed-Signal Circuit Design (1 paper), Clinical practice guidelines implementation (1 paper), Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices (1 paper), Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments (1 paper) and SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine (475 citations), Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging (70 citations), Emergency Medicine (16 citations), Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine (5 citations) and Molecular Biology (60 citations). James Glancy has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include D P de Bono, Chris Garratt, K L Woods, KL Woods, David P. de Bono, P.J. Weston, Clifford J. Garratt, Paul G. McNally, H. Thurston and David Pitcher. Their work appears in journals such as Heart, International Journal of Cardiology, European Heart Journal, The Lancet and Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

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