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.
Why do people sue doctors? A study of patients and relatives taking legal action
1994484 citationsCharles Vincent, Andrew Phillips et al.The Lancetprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of Mike Young'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 Mike Young with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Mike Young more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Mike Young. 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 Mike Young. The network helps show where Mike Young may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of Mike Young
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Mike Young.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Mike Young 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 Mike Young. Mike Young is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Meyer, William J., et al.. (2009). A Multi-Platform Approach to Examine Spatial and Temporal Variability of Antecedent Moisture Content on Model-Generated Runoff from a Watershed. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts. 2009.1 indexed citations
6.
Karoly, David J., Ronnie Harding, John H. Williams, et al.. (2009). Optimising Carbon in the Australian Landscape.11 indexed citations
Young, Mike, et al.. (2006). Informing Reform: Scoping the affects, effects and effectiveness of high level water policy reforms on irrigation investment and practice in four irrigation areas.5 indexed citations
10.
Young, Mike, et al.. (2003). Robust Reform: Implementing robust institutional arrangements to achieve efficient water use in Australia. RePEc: Research Papers in Economics.10 indexed citations
11.
Young, Mike, et al.. (2003). Origin, Age, and Geochemistry of the Tuff of Saguache Creek, Southwestern Colorado. AGUFM. 2003.1 indexed citations
Young, Mike, et al.. (2000). Inter-State Water Trading: A Two Year Review. eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania).23 indexed citations
14.
Booker, N. A., et al.. (2000). Sustainable alternatives in the provision of urban water services - an Australian Approach. 1247.2 indexed citations
15.
Gowing, J.W. & Mike Young. (1996). Final Technical Report for project R5170. Evaluation and promotion of rainwater harvesting in semi-arid areas..1 indexed citations
16.
Vincent, Charles, Andrew Phillips, & Mike Young. (1994). Why do people sue doctors? A study of patients and relatives taking legal action. The Lancet. 343(8913). 1609–1613.484 indexed citations breakdown →
17.
Young, Mike. (1992). Sustainable investment and resource use.45 indexed citations
18.
Young, Mike. (1991). Towards sustainable agricultural development.15 indexed citations
19.
Harrington, G. N., A. D. Wilson, & Mike Young. (1985). Management of Australia's Rangelands. Journal of Range Management. 38(6). 565–565.113 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.