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.
This map shows the geographic impact of Mae O. Gordon'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 Mae O. Gordon with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Mae O. Gordon more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Mae O. Gordon. 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 Mae O. Gordon. The network helps show where Mae O. Gordon may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Mae O. Gordon
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Mae O. Gordon.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Mae O. Gordon 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 Mae O. Gordon. Mae O. Gordon is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Hartwick, Andrew T. E., Ellen Shorter, Jennifer Harthan, et al.. (2019). Reducing Adenoviral Patient-Infected Days (RAPID) Study: A Randomized Trial Assessing Efficacy of One Time, In-Office Application of 5% Povidone-Iodine in Treatment of Adenoviral Conjunctivitis. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 60(9). 6257–6257.2 indexed citations
11.
Shorter, Ellen, et al.. (2018). Reducing Adenoviral Patient Infected Days (RAPID) Study: Success in Masking Subjects and Clinicians From Identifying Treatment with Ophthalmic Povidone-Iodine 5% (PVP-I).. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 59(9). 3788–3788.1 indexed citations
12.
Shorter, Ellen, et al.. (2017). Reducing Adenoviral Patient Infected Days (RAPID) Study: Association of Clinical Signs and Symptoms with qPCR confirmed Adenoviral Conjunctivitis. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 58(8). 4360–4360.1 indexed citations
Zangwill, Linda M., Stefano Miglior, Esther M. Hoff mann, et al.. (2011). Confocal Scanning Laser Ophthalmoscopy (CSLO) To Predict The Onset Of Primary Open Angle Glaucoma (POAG): Pooled Analysis Of The CSLO Ancillary Study To The Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS) And The European Glaucoma Prevention Study (EGPS). Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 52(14). 3060–3060.1 indexed citations
15.
Ghasia, Fatema F., Bradley Wilson, Mae O. Gordon, Jan Brunstrom, & Lawrence Tychsen. (2007). Validating a Pediatric Cerebral Palsy Visuomotor Impairment Questionnaire. Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 48(13). 954–954.4 indexed citations
16.
Keltner, John L., Chris A. Johnson, Juanjuan Fan, et al.. (2003). Classification of Glaucomatous Visual Field Abnormalities In the Ocular Hypertension Treatment Study (OHTS). Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science. 44(13). 75–75.1 indexed citations
17.
Bennett, Richard G., Michael A. Kass, Dale K. Heuer, et al.. (2002). THE OCULAR HYPERTENSIVE TREATMENT STUDY.. Optometry and Vision Science. 79(Supplement). 15–15.1 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.