L. Curtis

542 total citations
12 papers, 381 citations indexed

About

L. Curtis is a scholar working on Equine, Speech and Hearing and Small Animals. According to data from OpenAlex, L. Curtis has authored 12 papers receiving a total of 381 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 5 papers in Equine, 3 papers in Speech and Hearing and 2 papers in Small Animals. Recurrent topics in L. Curtis's work include Veterinary Equine Medical Research (5 papers), Veterinary Practice and Education Studies (3 papers) and Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills (2 papers). L. Curtis is often cited by papers focused on Veterinary Equine Medical Research (5 papers), Veterinary Practice and Education Studies (3 papers) and Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills (2 papers). L. Curtis collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom and United States. L. Curtis's co-authors include Mark Strauss, Theodore A. Petti, Daniel G. Sheahan, Charles H. Goyette, Alexander W. Siegel, Sarah Freeman, Gary England, John Burford, Harry S. Soroff and Simon J. Simonian and has published in prestigious journals such as Child Development, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology and Veterinary Record.

In The Last Decade

L. Curtis

9 papers receiving 337 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
L. Curtis United Kingdom	7	191	179	124	47	42	12	381
Danielle Hoffmann Luxembourg	9	148 0.8×	291 1.6×	154 1.2×	103 2.2×	63 1.5×	17	337
Casey Irwin Helvey United States	8	275 1.4×	277 1.5×	234 1.9×	66 1.4×	57 1.4×	13	427
James Merola United States	10	77 0.4×	51 0.3×	14 0.1×	286 6.1×	39 0.9×	16	444
Rachele Fanari Italy	9	179 0.9×	57 0.3×	43 0.3×	73 1.6×	8 0.2×	22	386
Venera Gashaj Switzerland	10	269 1.4×	135 0.8×	142 1.1×	87 1.9×	7 0.2×	18	431
Sarah Keeble United Kingdom	5	199 1.0×	259 1.4×	172 1.4×	107 2.3×	8 0.2×	6	366
Winifred Mark United Kingdom	7	37 0.2×	51 0.3×	77 0.6×	68 1.4×	3 0.1×	9	359
Mário Pinto Italy	13	79 0.4×	168 0.9×	56 0.5×	281 6.0×	36 0.9×	32	403
Isabella Lonciari Italy	5	229 1.2×	114 0.6×	67 0.5×	146 3.1×		9	346
Veronica Edwards Australia	8	482 2.5×	148 0.8×	69 0.6×	348 7.4×		10	662

Countries citing papers authored by L. Curtis

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by L. Curtis

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of L. Curtis

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of L. Curtis. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of L. Curtis 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 L. Curtis. L. Curtis 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:

12 of 12 papers shown

1.

Curtis, L., et al.. (2015). Systematic Review of Evidence for Plasma and Peritoneal Lactate as a Diagnostic Test for Surgical Colic. Equine Veterinary Journal. 47(S48). 5–6.

2.

Freeman, Sarah & L. Curtis. (2015). Developing best practice guidelines on equine colic. Veterinary Record. 176(2). 38–40. 5 indexed citations

3.

Curtis, L., et al.. (2015). Veterinary practitioners’ selection of diagnostic tests for the primary evaluation of colic in the horse. Veterinary Record Open. 2(2). e000145–e000145. 6 indexed citations

4.

Curtis, L., et al.. (2015). Appraisal of the Current Evidence for Diagnostic Tests That Differentiate Medical and Surgical Colic. Equine Veterinary Journal. 47(S48). 5–5.

5.

Curtis, L., et al.. (2014). Systematic Review of Risk Factors for Equine Colic. Equine Veterinary Journal. 46(S47). 21–21. 1 indexed citations

6.

Strauss, Mark & L. Curtis. (1981). Infant Perception of Numerosity. Child Development. 52(4). 1146–1146. 237 indexed citations

7.

Strauss, Mark & L. Curtis. (1981). Infant Perception of Numerosity. Child Development. 52(4). 1146–1152. 10 indexed citations

8.

Curtis, L., et al.. (1981). Developmental differences in cognitive mapping: Configurational knowledge of familiar large-scale environments. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 31(3). 456–469. 20 indexed citations

9.

Simonian, Simon J., Harry S. Soroff, & L. Curtis. (1979). Recent advances in the pathogenesis and control of massive upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage.. PubMed. 11. 127–47.

10.

Goyette, Charles H., et al.. (1978). Effects of artificial colors on hyperkinetic children: a double blind challenge study. 14(2). 39–40. 28 indexed citations

11.

Petti, Theodore A., et al.. (1978). Effects of artificial colors on hyperkinetic children: a double-blind challenge study [proceedings].. PubMed. 14(2). 39–40. 42 indexed citations

12.

Curtis, L. & Daniel G. Sheahan. (1969). Heterotopic tissues in the gallbladder.. PubMed. 88(6). 677–83. 32 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