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.
The Significance of Saturation
19951.9k citationsJanice M. MorseQualitative Health Researchprofile →
Peers
Janice M. Morse
Comparison fields: 5 of 168
General Health Professions624
Sociology and Political Science475
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health355
Countries citing papers authored by Janice M. Morse
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of Janice M. Morse'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 Janice M. Morse with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Janice M. Morse more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Janice M. Morse. 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 Janice M. Morse. The network helps show where Janice M. Morse may publish in the future.
Janice M. Morse is a scholar working on Infectious Diseases, Organic Chemistry and Surgery, having authored 14 papers that have together received 2.1k indexed citations. The work is most often cited by research in Research and Theory (28 citations), General Health Professions (624 citations) and Family Practice (51 citations). Their work appears in journals such as Qualitative Health Research.
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.