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.
Sexual behaviour in Britain: partnerships, practices, and HIV risk behaviours
2001629 citationsMargaret Johnson, Catherine H Mercer et al.The Lancetprofile →
Sexual behaviour in Britain: early heterosexual experience
2001516 citationsKaye Wellings, Kiran Nanchahal et al.The Lancetprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Julia Field'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 Julia Field with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Julia Field more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Julia Field. 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 Julia Field. The network helps show where Julia Field may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Julia Field
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Julia Field.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Julia Field 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 Julia Field. Julia Field is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Johnson, Margaret, Catherine H Mercer, Bob Erens, et al.. (2001). Sexual behaviour in Britain: partnerships, practices, and HIV risk behaviours. The Lancet. 358(9296). 1835–1842.629 indexed citations breakdown →
Wellings, Kaye, Kiran Nanchahal, Wendy Macdowall, et al.. (2001). Sexual behaviour in Britain: early heterosexual experience. The Lancet. 358(9296). 1843–1850.516 indexed citations breakdown →
Erens, Bob, Sally McManus, Julia Field, et al.. (2001). National survey of sexual attitudes and lifestyles II: Technical report. LSHTM Research Online (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine).69 indexed citations
Wellings, Kaye, J Wadsworth, Margaret Johnson, & Julia Field. (1996). Teenage sexuality, fertility and life chances. Report prepared for the Department of Health using data from the National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles. UCL Discovery (University College London).15 indexed citations
Bajos, Nathalie, J Wadsworth, B. Ducot, et al.. (1995). Sexual behaviour and HIV epidemiology: comparative analysis in France and Britain. The ACSF Group.. PubMed. 9(7). 735–43.37 indexed citations
Heath, Anthony, et al.. (1985). How Britain Votes. Medical Entomology and Zoology.295 indexed citations
18.
Field, Julia & Henry Field. (1967). Conservation in the USSR.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.