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.
Strategies for Academic and Clinician Engagement in Community-Participatory Partnered Research
2007415 citationsLoretta Jones, Kenneth B. WellsJAMAprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Loretta Jones'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 Loretta Jones with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Loretta Jones more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Loretta Jones. 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 Loretta Jones. The network helps show where Loretta Jones may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Loretta Jones
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Loretta Jones.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Loretta Jones 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 Loretta Jones. Loretta Jones is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Alegrı́a, Margarita, Norah Mulvaney‐Day, Enola K. Proctor, et al.. (2011). Community-based partnered research: new directions in mental health services research.. Europe PMC (PubMed Central). 21(3 Suppl 1). S1–16.20 indexed citations
Jones, Loretta, Kenneth B. Wells, Keith C. Norris, B. Jean Meade, & Paul Koegel. (2009). Chapter 1. The Vision, Valley, and Victory of Community Engagement. Ethnicity & Disease. 19.4 indexed citations
12.
Wells, Kenneth B., Paul Koegel, Loretta Jones, & B. Jean Meade. (2009). Chapter 6. Work Through the Valley: Evaluate. Ethnicity & Disease. 19.2 indexed citations
13.
Jones, Loretta, Kenneth B. Wells, B. Jean Meade, et al.. (2009). Chapter 5. Work Through the Valley: Do. Ethnicity & Disease. 19.1 indexed citations
14.
Jones, Loretta, et al.. (2009). Chapter 2. Begin Your Partnership: The Process of Engagement. Ethnicity & Disease. 19.3 indexed citations
15.
Jones, Loretta, Kenneth B. Wells, & B. Jean Meade. (2009). Chapter 7. Celebrate Victory. Ethnicity & Disease. 19.1 indexed citations
16.
Jones, Loretta, et al.. (2009). Begin your partnership: the process of engagement.. PubMed. 19(4 Suppl 6). S6–8.22 indexed citations
Jones, Loretta, Kenneth B. Wells, & B. Jean Meade. (2009). Celebrate victory.. PubMed. 19(4 Suppl 6). S6–59.2 indexed citations
19.
Jones, Loretta & Kenneth B. Wells. (2007). Strategies for Academic and Clinician Engagement in Community-Participatory Partnered Research. JAMA. 297(4). 407–407.415 indexed citations breakdown →
20.
Wells, Kenneth B., Anne Staunton, Keith C. Norris, et al.. (2006). Building an academic-community partnered network for clinical services research: the Community Health Improvement Collaborative (CHIC).. PubMed. 16(1 Suppl 1). S3–17.76 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.