Micaela Pinho

510 total citations
54 papers, 324 citations indexed

About

Micaela Pinho is a scholar working on Economics and Econometrics, General Health Professions and Sociology and Political Science. According to data from OpenAlex, Micaela Pinho has authored 54 papers receiving a total of 324 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 27 papers in Economics and Econometrics, 21 papers in General Health Professions and 9 papers in Sociology and Political Science. Recurrent topics in Micaela Pinho's work include Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (26 papers), Healthcare Policy and Management (18 papers) and Global Health Care Issues (10 papers). Micaela Pinho is often cited by papers focused on Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (26 papers), Healthcare Policy and Management (18 papers) and Global Health Care Issues (10 papers). Micaela Pinho collaborates with scholars based in Portugal, Brazil and Slovakia. Micaela Pinho's co-authors include Sofia Gomes, Ana Pinto Borges, Jorge Marques, Jo�ão M. Lopes, Paula Veiga, Anabela Botelho, Alexandra M. Araújo, Pedro Mota Veiga, Pedro Ferreira and Fátima Leal and has published in prestigious journals such as SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, Journal of Cleaner Production and Scientific Reports.

In The Last Decade

Micaela Pinho

48 papers receiving 310 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Micaela Pinho Portugal 10 109 89 82 82 41 54 324
Yolanda Santana-Jiménez Spain 8 74 0.7× 210 2.4× 28 0.3× 56 0.7× 21 0.5× 11 385
Gillian MacNaughton United States 9 41 0.4× 114 1.3× 69 0.8× 10 0.1× 36 0.9× 41 265
Qun Wang China 9 57 0.5× 70 0.8× 127 1.5× 31 0.4× 20 0.5× 15 339
Andrew T. Carswell United States 11 131 1.2× 115 1.3× 62 0.8× 22 0.3× 18 0.4× 48 360
Heiner Schumacher Germany 10 116 1.1× 58 0.7× 43 0.5× 32 0.4× 5 0.1× 39 282
Shinae Choi United States 10 59 0.5× 54 0.6× 117 1.4× 74 0.9× 55 1.3× 37 362
Caroline Wong Australia 8 13 0.1× 59 0.7× 98 1.2× 65 0.8× 10 0.2× 32 339
Abi Badejo Australia 11 17 0.2× 84 0.9× 59 0.7× 79 1.0× 29 0.7× 19 268
Kathleen Hudson United States 6 207 1.9× 49 0.6× 50 0.6× 44 0.5× 59 1.4× 11 355
Xiangdan Piao Japan 10 51 0.5× 73 0.8× 50 0.6× 40 0.5× 64 1.6× 28 308

Countries citing papers authored by Micaela Pinho

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Micaela Pinho

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Micaela Pinho

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Micaela Pinho. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Micaela Pinho 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 Micaela Pinho. Micaela Pinho 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
1.
Pinho, Micaela & Fátima Leal. (2025). An intelligent community-based system for healthcare prioritisation. Scientific Reports. 15(1). 34066–34066.
2.
Leal, Fátima, et al.. (2025). Synthetic Data Generation for Binary and Multi-Class Classification in the Health Domain. Information. 16(11). 986–986.
4.
Moura, Ana & Micaela Pinho. (2025). A Scheduling Optimization Approach to Reduce Outpatient Waiting Times for Specialists. Healthcare. 13(7). 749–749.
5.
Pinho, Micaela & Mara Madaleno. (2024). Willingness to pay more health taxes? The relevance of personality traits and situational effects. Mind & Society. 23(1-2). 1–31. 1 indexed citations
6.
Pinho, Micaela & Sofia Gomes. (2024). Environmental sustainability from a generational lens—A study comparing generation X, Y, and Z ecological commitment. Business and Society Review. 129(3). 349–372. 8 indexed citations
7.
Pinho, Micaela & Fátima Leal. (2024). AI-Enhanced Strategies to Ensure New Sustainable Destination Tourism Trends Among the 27 European Union Member States. Sustainability. 16(22). 9844–9844. 2 indexed citations
8.
Lopes, Jo�ão M., Micaela Pinho, & Sofia Gomes. (2023). Green to gold: consumer circular choices may boost circular business models. Environment Development and Sustainability. 27(10). 24505–24533. 11 indexed citations
9.
Gomes, Sofia, Micaela Pinho, & Jo�ão M. Lopes. (2023). From environmental sustainability practices to green innovations: Evidence from small and medium‐sized manufacturing companies. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. 31(3). 1677–1687. 17 indexed citations
10.
Pinho, Micaela & Alexandra M. Araújo. (2022). Personality and perceptions about the use of personal responsibility for illness as a health care rationing criteria.. Journal of Neuroscience Psychology and Economics. 15(3). 137–151. 3 indexed citations
11.
Pinho, Micaela & Alexandra M. Araújo. (2021). How to fairly allocate scarce medical resources? Controversial preferences of healthcare professionals with different personal characteristics. Health Economics Policy and Law. 17(4). 1–18. 5 indexed citations
12.
Pinho, Micaela. (2021). Public preferences for allocating absolute scarce critical healthcare resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Health Organization and Management. 35(8). 964–986. 9 indexed citations
13.
Pinho, Micaela, et al.. (2020). Does implicit healthcare rationing impose an unfair legal burden on doctors? A study of Portuguese jurisprudence. Medical Law International. 20(1). 31–57. 1 indexed citations
14.
Pinho, Micaela & Jorge Marques. (2019). Business tourism in Porto: an empirical investigation of its potentialities and development challenges. International Journal of Tourism Cities. 7(1). 1–12. 7 indexed citations
15.
Pinho, Micaela & Ana Pinto Borges. (2019). A Scoring Index of Prioritization Factors Between Patients. The Health Care Manager. 38(3). 267–275. 2 indexed citations
16.
Pinho, Micaela & Anabela Botelho. (2018). Inference Procedures to Quantify the Efficiency–Equality Trade-Off in Health from Stated Preferences: A Case Study in Portugal. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy. 16(4). 503–513. 6 indexed citations
17.
Pinho, Micaela & Pedro Mota Veiga. (2018). Attitudes of health professionals concerning bedside rationing criteria: a survey from Portugal. Health Economics Policy and Law. 15(1). 113–127. 6 indexed citations
18.
Borges, Ana Pinto & Micaela Pinho. (2017). Should Lifestyles Be a Criterion for Healthcare Rationing? Evidence from a Portuguese Survey.. PubMed. 17(4). e00399–e00399. 3 indexed citations
19.
Pinho, Micaela & Ana Pinto Borges. (2017). Relative Importance Assigned to Health Care Rationing Principles at the Bedside. The Health Care Manager. 36(4). 334–341. 3 indexed citations
20.
Pinho, Micaela & Paula Veiga. (2009). Avaliação de custo-utilidade como mecanismo de alocação de recursos em saúde: revisão do debate. Cadernos de Saúde Pública. 25(2). 239–250. 7 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