Nicholas Latimer

3.9k total citations · 1 hit paper
107 papers, 2.7k citations indexed

About

Nicholas Latimer is a scholar working on Economics and Econometrics, Statistics and Probability and Rehabilitation. According to data from OpenAlex, Nicholas Latimer has authored 107 papers receiving a total of 2.7k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 58 papers in Economics and Econometrics, 33 papers in Statistics and Probability and 10 papers in Rehabilitation. Recurrent topics in Nicholas Latimer's work include Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (55 papers), Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials (26 papers) and Advanced Causal Inference Techniques (23 papers). Nicholas Latimer is often cited by papers focused on Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (55 papers), Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials (26 papers) and Advanced Causal Inference Techniques (23 papers). Nicholas Latimer collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and Sweden. Nicholas Latimer's co-authors include Keith R. Abrams, Paul C. Lambert, Rebecca Palmer, Allan Wailoo, James P. Morden, Cindy Cooper, Rachel O’Mahony, John Dickson, Philip G. Conaghan and Michael J. Crowther and has published in prestigious journals such as JAMA, Journal of Clinical Oncology and SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología.

In The Last Decade

Nicholas Latimer

100 papers receiving 2.7k citations

Hit Papers

Survival Analysis for Economic Evaluations Alongside Clin... 2013 2026 2017 2021 2013 100 200 300

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Nicholas Latimer United Kingdom 29 855 542 510 319 298 107 2.7k
Jipan Xie United States 24 351 0.4× 90 0.2× 485 1.0× 370 1.2× 304 1.0× 133 2.4k
Elizabeth Molsen United States 8 446 0.5× 43 0.1× 220 0.4× 213 0.7× 279 0.9× 8 2.6k
John Hornberger United States 32 724 0.8× 141 0.3× 468 0.9× 303 0.9× 125 0.4× 109 3.6k
James Wason United Kingdom 27 494 0.6× 1.0k 1.9× 101 0.2× 268 0.8× 201 0.7× 160 2.8k
Patricia W. Spitz United States 20 478 0.6× 95 0.2× 219 0.4× 336 1.1× 497 1.7× 25 8.1k
Y Dündar United Kingdom 35 319 0.4× 66 0.1× 511 1.0× 697 2.2× 201 0.7× 94 3.1k
Moshe Fridman United States 32 243 0.3× 42 0.1× 674 1.3× 282 0.9× 178 0.6× 132 3.8k
K. Jack Ishak United States 21 438 0.5× 191 0.4× 507 1.0× 209 0.7× 128 0.4× 43 2.0k
Niklas Zethraeus Sweden 31 1.1k 1.3× 69 0.1× 632 1.2× 123 0.4× 390 1.3× 76 4.2k
Pennifer Erickson United States 15 593 0.7× 108 0.2× 186 0.4× 133 0.4× 241 0.8× 21 1.9k

Countries citing papers authored by Nicholas Latimer

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Nicholas Latimer

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Nicholas Latimer

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Nicholas Latimer. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Nicholas Latimer 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 Nicholas Latimer. Nicholas Latimer 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.
Latimer, Nicholas, et al.. (2024). An Evaluation of an Algorithm for the Selection of Flexible Survival Models for Cancer Immunotherapies: Pass or Fail?. PharmacoEconomics. 42(12). 1395–1412. 1 indexed citations
2.
Taylor, Kurt, Nicholas Latimer, Thomas Douglas, et al.. (2024). Treatment Effect Waning in Immuno-oncology Health Technology Assessments: A Review of Assumptions and Supporting Evidence with Proposals to Guide Modelling. PharmacoEconomics. 42(11). 1181–1196. 2 indexed citations
4.
Mt‐Isa, Shahrul, et al.. (2024). Is inverse probability of censoring weighting a safer choice than per-protocol analysis in clinical trials?. Statistical Methods in Medical Research. 34(2). 286–306. 1 indexed citations
7.
Turner, Alex, Cormac Sammon, Nicholas Latimer, et al.. (2023). Transporting Comparative Effectiveness Evidence Between Countries: Considerations for Health Technology Assessments. PharmacoEconomics. 42(2). 165–176. 7 indexed citations
8.
Palmer, Rebecca, Munyaradzi Dimairo, Nicholas Latimer, et al.. (2020). Computerised speech and language therapy or attention control added to usual care for people with long-term post-stroke aphasia: the Big CACTUS three-arm RCT. Health Technology Assessment. 24(19). 1–176. 34 indexed citations
9.
Sullivan, Thomas, Nicholas Latimer, Jodi Gray, et al.. (2020). Adjusting for Treatment Switching in Oncology Trials: A Systematic Review and Recommendations for Reporting. Value in Health. 23(3). 388–396. 22 indexed citations
10.
Thomas, Shirley, Avril Drummond, Nadina B. Lincoln, et al.. (2019). Behavioural activation therapy for post-stroke depression: the BEADS feasibility RCT. Health Technology Assessment. 23(47). 1–176. 41 indexed citations
11.
Kearns, Benjamin, John Stevens, Praveen Thokala, et al.. (2019). A Review of Survival Analysis Methods Used in NICE Technology Appraisals of Cancer Treatments: Consistency, Limitations, and Areas for Improvement. Medical Decision Making. 39(8). 899–909. 36 indexed citations
13.
O’Brien, Stephen J., Letizia Foroni, Wendy Osborne, et al.. (2018). Spirit 2: Final 5 Year Analysis of the UK National Cancer Research Institute Randomized Study Comparing Imatinib with Dasatinib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Chronic Phase CML. Blood. 132(Supplement 1). 457–457. 10 indexed citations
14.
Bullement, Ash, et al.. (2018). Survival Extrapolation in Cancer Immunotherapy: A Validation-Based Case Study. Value in Health. 22(3). 276–283. 53 indexed citations
16.
Whitehurst, David G. T., Nicholas Latimer, Aura Kagan, et al.. (2014). Preference-based health-related quality of life in the context of aphasia: a research synthesis. Aphasiology. 29(7). 763–780. 12 indexed citations
17.
Latimer, Nicholas, Keith R. Abrams, Paul C. Lambert, et al.. (2013). A Guide to Adjusting Survival Time Estimates to Account for Treatment Switching in Randomised Controlled Trials. Value in Health. 16(7). A325–A325. 22 indexed citations
18.
Boucher, Rebecca H., Keith R. Abrams, Michael J. Crowther, et al.. (2013). Adjusting for Treatment Switching in Clinical Trials When Only Summary Data Are Available – An Evaluation of Potential Methods. Value in Health. 16(7). A610–A611. 1 indexed citations
19.
Mulhern, Brendan, Donna Rowen, Ann Jacoby, et al.. (2012). The development of a QALY measure for epilepsy: NEWQOL-6D. Epilepsy & Behavior. 24(1). 36–43. 52 indexed citations
20.
Mulhern, Brendan, Donna Rowen, John Brazier, et al.. (2010). Developing a health state classification system from NEWQOL for epilepsy using classical psychometric techniques and Rasch analysis: a technical report. Munich Personal RePEc Archive (Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich). 2 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