Nathaniel J. Soper

979 total citations · 1 hit paper
8 papers, 725 citations indexed

About

Nathaniel J. Soper is a scholar working on Surgery, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine and Oncology. According to data from OpenAlex, Nathaniel J. Soper has authored 8 papers receiving a total of 725 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 8 papers in Surgery, 6 papers in Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine and 2 papers in Oncology. Recurrent topics in Nathaniel J. Soper's work include Gallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders (5 papers), Pediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and Treatments (4 papers) and Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research (2 papers). Nathaniel J. Soper is often cited by papers focused on Gallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders (5 papers), Pediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and Treatments (4 papers) and Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research (2 papers). Nathaniel J. Soper collaborates with scholars based in United States and Ireland. Nathaniel J. Soper's co-authors include Judith M. Connett, Gordon W. Philpott, Mary K. Reinhard, Daniel B. Jones, James W. Fleshman, Mark D. Rodefeld, Robert S. Figenshau, Paramjit S. Chandhoke, Mark P. Callery and Ralph V. Clayman and has published in prestigious journals such as Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery and Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques.

In The Last Decade

Nathaniel J. Soper

7 papers receiving 671 citations

Hit Papers

align trajectories

What are hit papers?

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.

Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy The New 'Gold Standard'?

1992 415 citations Nathaniel J. Soper Archives of Surgery profile →

Peers

Nathaniel J. Soper

SURGE

PRM

ONCOL

EM

GASTR

İsmail Okan Türkiye

G.N. Stultiëns Netherlands

Claudio Tombazzi United States

Joseph Kuriansky Israel

Zdravko Perko Croatia

P Tondelli Switzerland

S. Saad Germany

Robert G. Wiencek United States

Kaja Ludwig Germany

M. K. W. Li China

İsmail Okan Türkiye

Nathaniel J. Soper

442 ×0.8

SURGE

167 ×0.3

PRM

124 ×0.6

ONCOL

48 ×0.4

EM

18 ×0.3

GASTR

Citations per year, relative to Nathaniel J. Soper Nathaniel J. Soper (= 1×) peers İsmail Okan

Countries citing papers authored by Nathaniel J. Soper

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Nathaniel J. Soper

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Nathaniel J. Soper. 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 Nathaniel J. Soper. The network helps show where Nathaniel J. Soper may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Nathaniel J. Soper

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

8 of 8 papers shown

1.

Soper, Nathaniel J.. (2000). Intraoperative detection: intraoperative cholangiography vs. intraoperative ultrasonography. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery. 4(4). 334–335. 8 indexed citations

2.

Soper, Nathaniel J.. (1998). Intraoperative Screening for Common Bile Duct Stones: Ultrasound or Cholangiography?. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques. 8(3). 169–170.

3.

Rodefeld, Mark D. & Nathaniel J. Soper. (1998). Parahiatal hernia with volvulus and incarceration: laparoscopic repair of a rare defect. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery. 2(2). 193–197. 24 indexed citations

4.

Soper, Nathaniel J.. (1997). The Utility of Ultrasonography for Screening the Common Bile Duct during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy. Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques. 7(5). 271–276. 4 indexed citations

5.

Callery, Mark P., et al.. (1996). Laparoscopic Surgery of the Bile Ducts. Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Clinics of North America. 6(1). 81–105. 23 indexed citations

6.

Jones, Daniel B., Mary K. Reinhard, Nathaniel J. Soper, et al.. (1995). Impact of pneumoperitoneum on trocar site implantation of colon cancer in hamster model. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum. 38(11). 1182–1188. 194 indexed citations

7.

Soper, Nathaniel J.. (1992). Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy The New 'Gold Standard'?. Archives of Surgery. 127(8). 917–917. 415 indexed citations breakdown →

8.

Clayman, Ralph V., Louis R. Kavoussi, Elspeth M. McDougall, et al.. (1992). Laparoscopic nephrectomy: a review of 16 cases.. PubMed. 2(1). 29–34. 57 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