Lynne Maher

877 total citations · 1 hit paper
27 papers, 540 citations indexed

About

Lynne Maher is a scholar working on General Health Professions, Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine and Sociology and Political Science. According to data from OpenAlex, Lynne Maher has authored 27 papers receiving a total of 540 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 13 papers in General Health Professions, 3 papers in Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine and 3 papers in Sociology and Political Science. Recurrent topics in Lynne Maher's work include Health Policy Implementation Science (8 papers), Mental Health and Patient Involvement (6 papers) and Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development (3 papers). Lynne Maher is often cited by papers focused on Health Policy Implementation Science (8 papers), Mental Health and Patient Involvement (6 papers) and Innovative Approaches in Technology and Social Development (3 papers). Lynne Maher collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia. Lynne Maher's co-authors include John Bessant, Glenn Robert, Victoria Palmer, Lauralie Richard, Helen Herrman, Hilary Boyd, Jane Gunn, John Furler, Rosemary Callander and Donella Piper and has published in prestigious journals such as SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, Critical Care Medicine and The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science.

In The Last Decade

Lynne Maher

23 papers receiving 504 citations

Hit Papers

The Participatory Zeitgeist: an explanatory theoretical m... 2018 2026 2020 2023 2018 50 100 150 200

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Lynne Maher United Kingdom 10 294 74 65 49 47 27 540
Daniel Wolstenholme United Kingdom 13 365 1.2× 83 1.1× 72 1.1× 60 1.2× 71 1.5× 29 699
Paola Pierri United Kingdom 5 194 0.7× 52 0.7× 52 0.8× 55 1.1× 69 1.5× 9 428
Peter Slattery Australia 7 370 1.3× 116 1.6× 119 1.8× 26 0.5× 26 0.6× 21 783
Ashleigh Miatello Canada 9 251 0.9× 42 0.6× 52 0.8× 21 0.4× 29 0.6× 11 430
Dominique Giroux Canada 9 279 0.9× 101 1.4× 43 0.7× 19 0.4× 26 0.6× 35 462
Maarten van Limburg Netherlands 5 528 1.8× 204 2.8× 110 1.7× 49 1.0× 41 0.9× 7 992
Paul Sugarhood United Kingdom 8 341 1.2× 167 2.3× 157 2.4× 52 1.1× 104 2.2× 13 786
Catherine L. Lysack United States 15 198 0.7× 44 0.6× 122 1.9× 47 1.0× 30 0.6× 36 807
Karine Latulippe Canada 8 255 0.9× 97 1.3× 37 0.6× 18 0.4× 25 0.5× 20 418
Lorenz Harst Germany 12 397 1.4× 307 4.1× 50 0.8× 21 0.4× 16 0.3× 41 724

Countries citing papers authored by Lynne Maher

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Lynne Maher

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Lynne Maher

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Lynne Maher. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Lynne Maher 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 Lynne Maher. Lynne Maher 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
2.
Maher, Lynne. (2025). Building a culture for innovation: a leadership challenge. PubMed. 50(1). 4–6.
3.
Haines, Kimberley, Elizabeth Hibbert, Elizabeth H. Skinner, et al.. (2024). In-person peer support for critical care survivors: The ICU REcovery Solutions cO-Led through surVivor Engagement (ICURESOLVE) pilot randomised controlled trial. Australian Critical Care. 37(6). 859–865. 2 indexed citations
4.
Lai, Jie, Lynne Maher, Jiaqi Fu, et al.. (2023). Psychometric testing of the Chinese National Health Service Sustainability Model as an instrument to assess innovation in Chinese nursing settings. International Journal of Nursing Practice. 30(3). e13214–e13214. 2 indexed citations
5.
Maher, Lynne, et al.. (2023). Co-design of youth appropriate services for young people with rheumatic fever/rheumatic heart disease in Counties Manukau District. New Zealand Medical Journal. 136(1585). 63–72. 2 indexed citations
7.
Maher, Lynne, et al.. (2020). Personal electronic healthcare records: What influences consumers to engage with their clinical data online? A literature review. Health Information Management Journal. 51(1). 3–12. 29 indexed citations
8.
Dimopoulos‐Bick, Tara, Claire O’Connor, Helen Baines, et al.. (2019). “Anyone can co-design?”: A case study synthesis of six experience-based co-design (EBCD) projects for healthcare systems improvement in New South Wales, Australia. Patient Experience Journal. 6(2). 93–104. 54 indexed citations
9.
Palmer, Victoria, Rosemary Callander, Donella Piper, et al.. (2018). The Participatory Zeitgeist: an explanatory theoretical model of change in an era of coproduction and codesign in healthcare improvement. Medical Humanities. 45(3). 247–257. 209 indexed citations breakdown →
10.
Gauld, Robin, Jonathon Gray, Christina M. Krause, et al.. (2018). What initiatives do healthcare leaders agree are needed for healthcare system improvement? Results of a modified-Delphi study. Journal of Health Organization and Management. 32(8). 1002–1012. 3 indexed citations
11.
Maher, Lynne, et al.. (2010). The high impact actions for nursing and midwifery 1: keeping nourished--getting better.. PubMed. 106(27). 10–1. 2 indexed citations
12.
Maher, Lynne, et al.. (2010). Implementing the eight high impact actions to transform healthcare and boost efficiency.. PubMed. 106(3). 12–4. 2 indexed citations
13.
Maher, Lynne, et al.. (2010). The high impact actions for nursing and midwifery. 7: Promoting normal birth.. PubMed. 106(33). 16–7. 3 indexed citations
14.
Maher, Lynne, et al.. (2010). The high impact actions for nursing and midwifery 6: where to die when the time comes.. PubMed. 106(32). 18–9. 1 indexed citations
15.
Maher, Lynne, et al.. (2010). The high impact actions for nursing and midwifery. 3: Staying safe, preventing falls.. PubMed. 106(29). 12–3. 4 indexed citations
16.
Bessant, John & Lynne Maher. (2009). DEVELOPING RADICAL SERVICE INNOVATIONS IN HEALTHCARE — THE ROLE OF DESIGN METHODS. International Journal of Innovation Management. 13(4). 555–568. 75 indexed citations
17.
Rogers, Hugh, Lynne Maher, & Paul E. Plsek. (2009). Better by design : using simple rules to improve access to secondary care. DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library). 338(7691). 384–387. 2 indexed citations
18.
Maher, Lynne, et al.. (2008). Experience based design: a practical method of working with patients to redesign services. Clinical Governance An International Journal. 13(1). 51–58. 38 indexed citations
19.
Maher, Lynne, et al.. (2008). Accelerating the improvement process. Clinical Governance An International Journal. 13(1). 19–25. 9 indexed citations
20.
Robert, Glenn, et al.. (2007). Using a Design Approach to Assist Large-Scale Organizational Change. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. 43(1). 135–152. 47 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

Rankless by CCL
2026