Meredith Nahm

755 total citations
22 papers, 467 citations indexed

About

Meredith Nahm is a scholar working on Health Information Management, Management Science and Operations Research and Molecular Biology. According to data from OpenAlex, Meredith Nahm has authored 22 papers receiving a total of 467 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 12 papers in Health Information Management, 9 papers in Management Science and Operations Research and 6 papers in Molecular Biology. Recurrent topics in Meredith Nahm's work include Electronic Health Records Systems (12 papers), Data Quality and Management (9 papers) and Meta-analysis and systematic reviews (6 papers). Meredith Nahm is often cited by papers focused on Electronic Health Records Systems (12 papers), Data Quality and Management (9 papers) and Meta-analysis and systematic reviews (6 papers). Meredith Nahm collaborates with scholars based in United States and United Kingdom. Meredith Nahm's co-authors include Carl F. Pieper, W. Ed Hammond, Robert M. Califf, Denise Cifelli, Reesa Laws, Jennifer G. Robinson, Shelley A. Rusincovitch, John F. Dickerson, Alan Bauck and Michelle Smerek and has published in prestigious journals such as PLoS ONE, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association and Journal of Biomedical Informatics.

In The Last Decade

Meredith Nahm

22 papers receiving 450 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Meredith Nahm United States	11	161	132	128	94	67	22	467
Rebecca Kush United States	14	204 1.3×	205 1.6×	174 1.4×	136 1.4×	81 1.2×	30	693
Leonard DʼAvolio United States	15	90 0.6×	149 1.1×	92 0.7×	118 1.3×	26 0.4×	32	707
Archana Laxmisan United States	11	216 1.3×	71 0.5×	71 0.6×	53 0.6×	29 0.4×	12	685
Raphael W. Majeed Germany	13	149 0.9×	99 0.8×	111 0.9×	50 0.5×	40 0.6×	49	418
Björn Bergh Germany	11	184 1.1×	82 0.6×	240 1.9×	70 0.7×	39 0.6×	64	636
Björn Schreiweis Germany	11	147 0.9×	80 0.6×	213 1.7×	57 0.6×	39 0.6×	43	561
Daniel J. Nigrin United States	15	212 1.3×	117 0.9×	179 1.4×	114 1.2×	64 1.0×	22	797
Scott P. Narus United States	16	336 2.1×	149 1.1×	147 1.1×	93 1.0×	87 1.3×	58	796
Shelley A. Rusincovitch United States	9	127 0.8×	94 0.7×	73 0.6×	104 1.1×	25 0.4×	14	451
Roberto A. Rocha United States	17	293 1.8×	264 2.0×	119 0.9×	209 2.2×	63 0.9×	65	752

Countries citing papers authored by Meredith Nahm

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Meredith Nahm

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Meredith Nahm

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

20 of 20 papers shown

Richesson, Rachel, W. Ed Hammond, Meredith Nahm, et al.. (2013). Electronic health records based phenotyping in next-generation clinical trials: a perspective from the NIH Health Care Systems Collaboratory: Table 1. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 20(e2). e226–e231. 146 indexed citations

Nahm, Meredith & W. Ed Hammond. (2013). Data standard ≠ data quality.. PubMed. 192. 1208–1208. 1 indexed citations

Nahm, Meredith. (2012). Knowledge Acquisition from and Semantic Variability in Schizophrenia Clinical Trial Data.. ICIQ. 46–57. 1 indexed citations

Snyder, Denise C., et al.. (2012). Research Management Team (RMT): A Model for Research Support ‐Services at Duke University. Clinical and Translational Science. 5(6). 464–469. 5 indexed citations

Eisenstein, Eric L., Don Juzwishin, André Kushniruk, & Meredith Nahm. (2011). Defining a Framework for Health Information Technology Evaluation. Studies in health technology and informatics. 164. 94–9. 5 indexed citations

Walden, Anita, Meredith Nahm, José G. Conde, et al.. (2011). Economic analysis of centralized vs. decentralized electronic data capture in multi-center clinical studies.. PubMed. 164. 82–8. 7 indexed citations

Eisenstein, Eric L., et al.. (2010). Impact of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Management Information System (PROMIS) upon the Design and Operation of Multi-center Clinical Trials: a Qualitative Research Study. Journal of Medical Systems. 35(6). 1521–1530. 6 indexed citations

Johnson, Constance, Meredith Nahm, Ryan J. Shaw, et al.. (2010). Can prospective usability evaluation predict data errors?. PubMed. 2010. 346–50. 5 indexed citations

Nahm, Meredith, et al.. (2010). Design and implementation of an institutional case report form library. Clinical Trials. 8(1). 94–102. 10 indexed citations

10.

Sim, Ida, Simona Carini, Samson W. Tu, et al.. (2010). The human studies database project: federating human studies design data using the ontology of clinical research.. PubMed. 2010. 51–5. 28 indexed citations

11.

Nahm, Meredith, Anita Walden, Brian McCourt, et al.. (2010). Standardising clinical data elements. 3(4). 314–314. 7 indexed citations

12.

Nahm, Meredith, et al.. (2010). Distributed cognition artifacts on clinical research data collection forms.. PubMed. 2010. 36–40. 5 indexed citations

13.

Nahm, Meredith. (2010). Data Accuracy in Medical Record Abstraction. Digital Commons-TMC (Texas Medical Center). 3 indexed citations

14.

Nahm, Meredith, et al.. (2009). What can we learn from a decade of database audits? The Duke Clinical Research Institute experience, 1997—2006. Clinical Trials. 6(2). 141–150. 25 indexed citations

15.

Carini, Simona, Brad H. Pollock, Harold P. Lehmann, et al.. (2009). Development and evaluation of a study design typology for human research.. PubMed. 2009. 81–5. 12 indexed citations

16.

Nahm, Meredith, et al.. (2009). A centralized informatics infrastructure for the National Institute on Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network. Clinical Trials. 6(1). 67–75. 8 indexed citations

17.

Nahm, Meredith & Jiajie Zhang. (2008). Operationalization of the UFuRT methodology for usability analysis in the clinical research data management domain. Journal of Biomedical Informatics. 42(2). 327–333. 11 indexed citations

18.

Nahm, Meredith, et al.. (2008). Quantifying Data Quality for Clinical Trials Using Electronic Data Capture. PLoS ONE. 3(8). e3049–e3049. 83 indexed citations

19.

Kush, Rebecca, Liora Alschuler, Rosaria Maddalena Ruggeri, et al.. (2007). Implementing Single Source: The STARBRITE Proof-of-Concept Study. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association. 14(5). 662–673. 52 indexed citations

20.

McCourt, Brian, Robert A. Harrington, Keith A.A. Fox, et al.. (2007). Data Standards: At the Intersection of Sites, Clinical Research Networks, and Standards Development Initiatives. Drug Information Journal. 41(3). 393–404. 11 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