Neil Pillinger

598 citations
14 papers · 307 · h-index 6

Impact in

Papers in

Neil Pillinger

11 papers receiving 302 citations

Peers

Neil Pillinger
Comparison fields: 5 of 53
  • Geriatrics and Gerontology 42
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine 51
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine 59
  • Surgery 88
  • Biochemistry 11
Replace Lisa Verwijmeren with:
Lisa Verwijmeren Netherlands
David Raw United Kingdom
Yanli Zhao China
Sarah Ekeloef Denmark
Shinji Ishikawa Japan
L Davoli Italy
Luís Gamas Portugal
Polyana Mendes Canada
C. Selim Isbir Türkiye
Ryoji Fukushima Japan
Neil Pillinger relative to Lisa Verwijmeren Netherlands Lisa Verwijmeren's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.5×
Lisa Verwijmeren · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Neil Pillinger

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Neil Pillinger

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Neil Pillinger, 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 Neil Pillinger Line = papers co-authored together Neil Pillinger links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

14 of 14 papers shown
#Work
1 2017107
2 201874
3 202146
4 202131
5 201827
6 201810
7 20225
8 20253
9 20222
10 20241
11 20251
12 20260
13 20240
14 20250

About Neil Pillinger

Neil Pillinger is a scholar working on Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Surgery, Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Geriatrics and Gerontology and Neurology, having authored 14 papers that have together received 307 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes (6 papers), Intraperitoneal and Appendiceal Malignancies (2 papers), Frailty in Older Adults (2 papers), Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy (2 papers), Trauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation (1 paper), Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances (1 paper), Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (1 paper) and Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Geriatrics and Gerontology (42 citations), Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine (51 citations), Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine (59 citations), Surgery (88 citations) and Biochemistry (11 citations). Neil Pillinger has collaborated with scholars based in Australia, Canada and Libya. Frequent co-authors include Peter Kam, Michael J. Solomon, Daniel Steffens, Cherry Koh, Paula R. Beckenkamp, Hilmy Ismail, Linda Denehy, Nabila Ansari, Phillip A. Muñoz and Jane Young. Their work appears in journals such as Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, World Journal of Surgery, Cancers, Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica and Trials.

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