Medha Umarji

417 total citations
11 papers, 172 citations indexed

About

Medha Umarji is a scholar working on Information Systems, Information Systems and Management and Computer Science Applications. According to data from OpenAlex, Medha Umarji has authored 11 papers receiving a total of 172 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 7 papers in Information Systems, 6 papers in Information Systems and Management and 4 papers in Computer Science Applications. Recurrent topics in Medha Umarji's work include Software Engineering Techniques and Practices (6 papers), Software Engineering Research (5 papers) and Open Source Software Innovations (4 papers). Medha Umarji is often cited by papers focused on Software Engineering Techniques and Practices (6 papers), Software Engineering Research (5 papers) and Open Source Software Innovations (4 papers). Medha Umarji collaborates with scholars based in United States and Thailand. Medha Umarji's co-authors include Carolyn Seaman, Susan Elliott Sim, Cristina Videira Lopes, Henry H. Emurian, Hongfang Liu, Forrest Shull, Angelica Neisa, Güneş Koru, Khaled El Emam and A. Güneş Koru and has published in prestigious journals such as IEEE Software, ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology and PubMed.

In The Last Decade

Medha Umarji

11 papers receiving 163 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Medha Umarji United States	8	137	46	44	32	30	11	172
Luciana Lourdes Silva Brazil	7	154 1.1×	31 0.7×	70 1.6×	30 0.9×	18 0.6×	14	185
Ioannis Samoladas Greece	3	154 1.1×	73 1.6×	83 1.9×	27 0.8×	19 0.6×	3	193
Martin Briesch Germany	4	102 0.7×	67 1.5×	26 0.6×	109 3.4×	10 0.3×	9	245
José Matías Rivero Argentina	6	106 0.8×	25 0.5×	18 0.4×	22 0.7×	15 0.5×	13	151
Sruti Srinivasa Ragavan United States	7	86 0.6×	37 0.8×	66 1.5×	55 1.7×	43 1.4×	13	191
Andrew M. Gravell United Kingdom	9	137 1.0×	41 0.9×	28 0.6×	33 1.0×	7 0.2×	32	185
Claudia‐Lavinia Ignat France	9	93 0.7×	20 0.4×	15 0.3×	47 1.5×	20 0.7×	26	172
Emad Aghajani Switzerland	7	183 1.3×	67 1.5×	30 0.7×	89 2.8×	15 0.5×	13	234
Justin R. Erenkrantz United States	9	140 1.0×	18 0.4×	45 1.0×	78 2.4×	9 0.3×	13	214
Somit Gupta United States	7	53 0.4×	16 0.3×	35 0.8×	23 0.7×	13 0.4×	11	149

Countries citing papers authored by Medha Umarji

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Medha Umarji

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Medha Umarji

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

11 of 11 papers shown

1.

Philip, Kavita, et al.. (2012). Software reuse through methodical component reuse and amethodical snippet remixing. 1361–1370. 15 indexed citations

2.

Sim, Susan Elliott, et al.. (2011). How Well Do Search Engines Support Code Retrieval on the Web?. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology. 21(1). 1–25. 68 indexed citations

3.

Umarji, Medha & Carolyn Seaman. (2009). Gauging acceptance of software metrics: Comparing perspectives of managers and developers. 236–247. 7 indexed citations

4.

Umarji, Medha, Carolyn Seaman, A. Güneş Koru, & Hongfang Liu. (2009). Software Engineering Education for Bioinformatics. 216–223. 10 indexed citations

5.

Umarji, Medha & Forrest Shull. (2009). Measuring Developers: Aligning Perspectives and Other Best Practices. IEEE Software. 26(6). 92–94. 7 indexed citations

6.

Umarji, Medha, et al.. (2008). Teaching software engineering to end-users. 40–42. 5 indexed citations

7.

Umarji, Medha & Carolyn Seaman. (2008). Why do programmers avoid metrics?. 129–138. 8 indexed citations

8.

Koru, Güneş, Khaled El Emam, Angelica Neisa, & Medha Umarji. (2007). A survey of quality assurance practices in biomedical open source software projects.. PubMed. 9(2). e8–e8. 13 indexed citations

9.

Umarji, Medha & Henry H. Emurian. (2005). Acceptance Issues in Metrics Program Implementation. 20–20. 10 indexed citations

10.

Umarji, Medha & Carolyn Seaman. (2005). Predicting acceptance of Software Process Improvement. 1–6. 7 indexed citations

11.

Umarji, Medha & Carolyn Seaman. (2005). Predicting acceptance of Software Process Improvement. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes. 30(4). 1–6. 22 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