John Peek

1.1k total citations
33 papers, 850 citations indexed

About

John Peek is a scholar working on Reproductive Medicine, Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health. According to data from OpenAlex, John Peek has authored 33 papers receiving a total of 850 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 22 papers in Reproductive Medicine, 19 papers in Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health and 16 papers in Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health. Recurrent topics in John Peek's work include Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy (15 papers), Reproductive Biology and Fertility (13 papers) and Reproductive Health and Technologies (12 papers). John Peek is often cited by papers focused on Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy (15 papers), Reproductive Biology and Fertility (13 papers) and Reproductive Health and Technologies (12 papers). John Peek collaborates with scholars based in New Zealand, Australia and United States. John Peek's co-authors include Lynsey Cree, Paul L. Hofman, Elizabeth Hammond, Wayne S. Cutfield, Andrew N. Shelling, Colin D. Matthews, Peter D. Gluckman, Christine A. Kirby, Graham M. Warnes and Regan Jeffrey and has published in prestigious journals such as The Lancet, The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism and Human Reproduction.

In The Last Decade

John Peek

32 papers receiving 812 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
John Peek New Zealand 15 498 464 380 158 75 33 850
B. Hodes-Wertz United States 11 609 1.2× 540 1.2× 656 1.7× 83 0.5× 110 1.5× 30 958
Rachel Lévy France 18 231 0.5× 651 1.4× 477 1.3× 209 1.3× 150 2.0× 66 972
Deirdre Zander‐Fox Australia 19 471 0.9× 446 1.0× 523 1.4× 243 1.5× 74 1.0× 50 982
Suzanne Young United States 15 243 0.5× 516 1.1× 374 1.0× 133 0.8× 129 1.7× 16 1.1k
K. Friol Germany 6 288 0.6× 559 1.2× 364 1.0× 82 0.5× 41 0.5× 8 730
Catherine Coulson United Kingdom 8 275 0.6× 778 1.7× 411 1.1× 155 1.0× 103 1.4× 11 1.0k
Mark Bowman Australia 15 428 0.9× 440 0.9× 358 0.9× 69 0.4× 55 0.7× 27 711
P.A. Foster United Kingdom 6 249 0.5× 685 1.5× 366 1.0× 125 0.8× 89 1.2× 8 880
Elizabeth Watt United Kingdom 3 251 0.5× 706 1.5× 375 1.0× 124 0.8× 98 1.3× 4 891
N.E.A. Vogel Netherlands 8 554 1.1× 253 0.5× 301 0.8× 96 0.6× 124 1.7× 11 754

Countries citing papers authored by John Peek

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by John Peek

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of John Peek

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of John Peek. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of John Peek 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 John Peek. John Peek is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
2.
Vinnakota, Chitra, Lynsey Cree, John Peek, & Dean E. Morbeck. (2019). Incidence of high sperm DNA fragmentation in a targeted population of subfertile men. Systems Biology in Reproductive Medicine. 65(6). 451–457. 16 indexed citations
3.
Hammond, Elizabeth, John Peek, Andrew N. Shelling, et al.. (2016). Characterizing nuclear and mitochondrial DNA in spent embryo culture media: genetic contamination identified. Fertility and Sterility. 107(1). 220–228.e5. 100 indexed citations
4.
Hammond, Elizabeth, Mark P. Green, Andrew N. Shelling, et al.. (2016). Oocyte mitochondrial deletions and heteroplasmy in a bovine model of ageing and ovarian stimulation. Molecular Human Reproduction. 22(4). 261–271. 24 indexed citations
5.
Cree, Lynsey, Elizabeth Hammond, Andrew N. Shelling, et al.. (2015). Maternal age and ovarian stimulation independently affect oocyte mtDNA copy number and cumulus cell gene expression in bovine clones. Human Reproduction. 30(6). 1410–1420. 47 indexed citations
6.
Hammond, Elizabeth, et al.. (2015). Assessing embryo quality by combining non-invasive markers: early time-lapse parameters reflect gene expression in associated cumulus cells. Human Reproduction. 30(8). 1850–1860. 35 indexed citations
7.
Peek, John, et al.. (2015). Many women undergoing fertility treatment make poor lifestyle choices that may affect treatment outcome. Human Reproduction. 30(7). 1617–1624. 47 indexed citations
8.
Birdsall, Mary, et al.. (2015). Sperm quality in New Zealand: Is the downward trend continuing?. PubMed. 128(1423). 50–6. 6 indexed citations
9.
Green, Mark P., Harriet Miles, A. B. Pleasants, et al.. (2014). The phenotype of an IVF child is associated with peri-conception measures of follicular characteristics and embryo quality. Human Reproduction. 29(11). 2583–2591. 3 indexed citations
10.
Green, Mark P., Harriet Miles, Sarah Hopkins, et al.. (2013). Phenotypic differences in children conceived from fresh and thawed embryos in in vitro fertilization compared with naturally conceived children. Fertility and Sterility. 99(7). 1898–1904. 33 indexed citations
11.
Peek, John, Elizabeth M. Robinson, Mark P. Green, et al.. (2012). Ovarian stimulation leads to shorter stature in childhood. Human Reproduction. 27(10). 3092–3099. 14 indexed citations
12.
Peek, John, et al.. (2011). Childhood outcomes of assisted reproductive technology. Human Reproduction. 26(9). 2392–2400. 62 indexed citations
13.
Gillett, Wayne R., John Peek, & Peter Herbison. (2011). Development of clinical priority access criteria for assisted reproduction and its evaluation on 1386 infertile couples in New Zealand. Human Reproduction. 27(1). 131–141. 20 indexed citations
14.
Coetzee, Kevin, et al.. (2006). Acceptance of single-embryo transfer by patients. Fertility and Sterility. 87(1). 207–209. 19 indexed citations
15.
Peek, John, et al.. (1994). Ethics and society: Attitudes of parents of young children to sperm donation—implications for donor recruitment. Human Reproduction. 9(7). 1355–1358. 25 indexed citations
16.
Peek, John, et al.. (1992). CASE REPORT: Ectopic pregnancy in a non-patent Fallopian tube following transfer of embryos to the contralateral tube. Human Reproduction. 7(1). 136–137. 4 indexed citations
17.
18.
Peek, John, et al.. (1986). The pH of cervical mucus, quality of semen, and outcome of the post-coital test.. PubMed. 4(3). 217–25. 14 indexed citations
19.
Matthews, Colin D., et al.. (1983). Screening of karyotype and semen quality in an artificial insemination program: acceptance and rejection criteria. Fertility and Sterility. 40(5). 648–654. 7 indexed citations
20.
Peek, John & W.B. Watkins. (1979). Gonadotrophin-inhibiting activity in seminal plasma from intact and vasectomized bulls. Reproduction. 57(2). 281–285. 12 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

Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by B. Hodes-Wertz Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Rachel Lévy Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Deirdre Zander‐Fox Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Suzanne Young Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by K. Friol Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Catherine Coulson Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Mark Bowman Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by P.A. Foster Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Elizabeth Watt Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by N.E.A. Vogel
Rankless by CCL
2026