Nadia Ismail

503 citations
41 papers · 308 · h-index 12

Impact in

Papers in

Nadia Ismail

34 papers receiving 300 citations

Peers

Nadia Ismail
Comparison fields: 5 of 82
  • Family Practice 25
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health 132
  • Gender Studies 32
  • Orthodontics 10
  • General Health Professions 42
Replace Shobhina G. Chheda with:
Shobhina G. Chheda United States
Barbara A Masser United States
Amy E. Fleming United States
Meg Keeley United States
K. Meredith Atkins United States
Moshe Weizberg United States
Gregory Briscoe United States
Joanne P.I. Fokkema Netherlands
Lisa Coplit United States
Ruth-Marie Fincher United States
Nadia Ismail relative to Shobhina G. Chheda United States Shobhina G. Chheda's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.8×
Shobhina G. Chheda · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Nadia Ismail

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Nadia Ismail

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Nadia Ismail, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Nadia Ismail Line = papers co-authored together Nadia Ismail links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 41 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 200830
2 202027
3 201822
4 199622
5 201919
6 201919
7 202018
8 201518
9 201016
10 201714
11 202013
12 202112
13 201910
14 20219
15 20228
16 20237
17 20165
18 20225
19 20224
20 20244

About Nadia Ismail

Nadia Ismail is a scholar working on Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, General Health Professions, Gender Studies, Emergency Medical Services and Family Practice, having authored 41 papers that have together received 308 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Innovations in Medical Education (16 papers), Diversity and Career in Medicine (5 papers), Medical Education and Admissions (5 papers), Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills (3 papers), Healthcare cost, quality, practices (2 papers), Patient Safety and Medication Errors (2 papers), Health and Medical Research Impacts (2 papers) and Radiology practices and education (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Family Practice (25 citations), Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (132 citations), Gender Studies (32 citations), Orthodontics (10 citations) and General Health Professions (42 citations). Nadia Ismail has collaborated with scholars based in United States, India and Egypt. Frequent co-authors include Charlene M. Dewey, John Coverdale, Amber T. Pincavage, F J Trevor Burke, Anne C. Gill, Cayla R. Teal, Nora Y. Osman, Cindy J. Lai, Michael Kisielewski and Allison Ferris. Their work appears in journals such as Academic Medicine, Journal of General Internal Medicine, The American Journal of Medicine, Medical Education Online and Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine.

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