Paul Tappenden

5.6k total citations
135 papers, 4.1k citations indexed

About

Paul Tappenden is a scholar working on Economics and Econometrics, Oncology and Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine. According to data from OpenAlex, Paul Tappenden has authored 135 papers receiving a total of 4.1k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 61 papers in Economics and Econometrics, 34 papers in Oncology and 30 papers in Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine. Recurrent topics in Paul Tappenden's work include Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (54 papers), Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection (18 papers) and Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy (12 papers). Paul Tappenden is often cited by papers focused on Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (54 papers), Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection (18 papers) and Pharmaceutical Economics and Policy (12 papers). Paul Tappenden collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, Australia and United States. Paul Tappenden's co-authors include J. Chilcott, Christopher Carroll, Katy Cooper, Suzy Paisley, Daniel Hind, Simon Eggington, Jeremy Wight, Jonathan Karnon, Ruth Wong and Eva Kaltenthaler and has published in prestigious journals such as Journal of Clinical Oncology, PLoS ONE and Gut.

In The Last Decade

Paul Tappenden

124 papers receiving 4.0k citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Paul Tappenden United Kingdom	38	1.1k	1.0k	726	492	478	135	4.1k
J. Chilcott United Kingdom	39	1.2k 1.1×	701 0.7×	548 0.8×	611 1.2×	331 0.7×	145	4.4k
Steven Teerenstra Netherlands	38	526 0.5×	1.4k 1.4×	689 0.9×	808 1.6×	589 1.2×	176	5.1k
Jeffrey A. Tice United States	41	573 0.5×	2.2k 2.1×	1.2k 1.6×	582 1.2×	795 1.7×	123	6.3k
Sarah Wordsworth United Kingdom	39	1.1k 1.0×	361 0.4×	617 0.8×	527 1.1×	287 0.6×	150	6.0k
Ken Redekop Netherlands	40	1.3k 1.2×	379 0.4×	497 0.7×	761 1.5×	406 0.8×	243	6.4k
Diana Sarfati New Zealand	37	600 0.5×	2.2k 2.1×	641 0.9×	725 1.5×	275 0.6×	162	5.1k
Thomas J. Hoerger United States	39	1.1k 1.0×	682 0.7×	381 0.5×	1.0k 2.1×	257 0.5×	106	6.2k
Bishal Gyawali Canada	32	1.6k 1.5×	1.3k 1.2×	644 0.9×	194 0.4×	130 0.3×	221	4.3k
LG Mantovani Italy	44	983 0.9×	450 0.4×	469 0.6×	317 0.6×	184 0.4×	366	7.8k
Josep M. Borràs Spain	33	440 0.4×	1.8k 1.8×	969 1.3×	543 1.1×	210 0.4×	261	4.4k

Countries citing papers authored by Paul Tappenden

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Paul Tappenden

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Paul Tappenden

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

20 of 20 papers shown

Cooper, Katy, Munira Essat, S Harnan, et al.. (2025). Gene expression profiling tests to guide adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in lymph node-positive early breast cancer: a systematic review. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 210(2). 229–247.

Gsteiger, Sandro, Keith R. Abrams, Dalia Dawoud, et al.. (2025). Evaluating amyloid-beta as a surrogate endpoint in trials of anti-amyloid-beta drugs in Alzheimer’s disease: a Bayesian meta-analysis. Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research. 15(1). e250095–e250095.

Dimairo, Munyaradzi, Rachel Glover, Diana Papaioannou, et al.. (2025). Mesenchymal intravenous stromal cell infusions in children with recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa: MissionEB protocol for a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, two-centre, crossover trial with an internal phase I dose de-escalation phase and open-label extension. BMJ Open. 15(5). e089857–e089857.

Tappenden, Paul, et al.. (2024). A Model-Based Economic Evaluation of Hypothetical Treatments for Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis in the UK: Implications for Pricing of New and Emerging Health Technologies. PharmacoEconomics. 42(9). 1003–1016. 1 indexed citations

Wildman, Martin J, Alicia O’Cathain, Chin Maguire, et al.. (2021). Self-management intervention to reduce pulmonary exacerbations by supporting treatment adherence in adults with cystic fibrosis: a randomised controlled trial. Thorax. 77(5). 461–469. 22 indexed citations

Murphy, Peter J., Sofia Dias, Robert Hodgson, et al.. (2021). Modelling approaches for histology-independent cancer drugs to inform NICE appraisals: a systematic review and decision-framework. Health Technology Assessment. 25(76). 1–228. 13 indexed citations

Cooper, Katy, Paul Tappenden, Anna Cantrell, & Kate Ennis. (2020). A systematic review of meta-analyses assessing the validity of tumour response endpoints as surrogates for progression-free or overall survival in cancer. British Journal of Cancer. 123(11). 1686–1696. 32 indexed citations

Burt, Richard K., Paul Tappenden, Xiaoqiang Han, et al.. (2020). Health economics and patient outcomes of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation versus disease-modifying therapies for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis in the United States of America. Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders. 45. 102404–102404. 17 indexed citations

Carroll, Christopher, Paul Tappenden, Rachid Rafia, et al.. (2017). Evolocumab for Treating Primary Hypercholesterolaemia and Mixed Dyslipidaemia: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal. PharmacoEconomics. 35(5). 537–547. 21 indexed citations

10.

Uttley, Lesley, Sophie Whyte, Shijie Ren, et al.. (2016). Degarelix for Treating Advanced Hormone-Dependent Prostate Cancer: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal. PharmacoEconomics. 35(7). 717–726. 12 indexed citations

11.

Carroll, Christopher, Eva Kaltenthaler, Paul Tappenden, et al.. (2016). The Role and Impact of Evidence Review Group Analyses in the Nice Single Technology Assessment (STA) Process. Value in Health. 19(7). A468–A469. 1 indexed citations

12.

Tappenden, Paul, S Harnan, Lesley Uttley, et al.. (2013). The Cost Effectiveness of Dry Powder Antibiotics for the Treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in Patients with Cystic Fibrosis. PharmacoEconomics. 32(2). 159–172. 18 indexed citations

13.

Uttley, Lesley, S Harnan, Anna Cantrell, et al.. (2013). Systematic review of the dry powder inhalers colistimethate sodium and tobramycin in cystic fibrosis. European Respiratory Review. 22(130). 476–486. 20 indexed citations

14.

Lord, Joanne, Sarah Willis, Julie Eatock, et al.. (2013). Economic modelling of diagnostic and treatment pathways in National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical guidelines: the Modelling Algorithm Pathways in Guidelines (MAPGuide) project. Health Technology Assessment. 17(58). v–vi, 1. 46 indexed citations

15.

Hoyle, Martin, Louise Crathorne, Jaime Peters, et al.. (2013). The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cetuximab (mono- or combination chemotherapy), bevacizumab (combination with non-oxaliplatin chemotherapy) and panitumumab (monotherapy) for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer after first-line chemotherapy (review of technology appraisal No.150 and part review of technology appraisal No. 118): a systematic review and economic model. Health Technology Assessment. 17(14). 1–237. 63 indexed citations

16.

Rathbone, John, Eva Kaltenthaler, Anna Richards, et al.. (2013). A systematic review of eculizumab for atypical haemolytic uraemic syndrome (aHUS). BMJ Open. 3(11). e003573–e003573. 76 indexed citations

17.

Chilcott, J., Paul Tappenden, Andrew Rawdin, et al.. (2010). Avoiding and identifying errors in health technology assessment models: qualitative study and methodological review. Health Technology Assessment. 14(25). iii–iv, ix. 57 indexed citations

18.

Tappenden, Paul, R Jackson, Katy Cooper, et al.. (2009). Amantadine, oseltamivir and zanamivir for the prophylaxis of influenza (including a review of existing guidance no. 67): a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technology Assessment. 13(11). iii, ix–xii, 1. 103 indexed citations

19.

Hind, Daniel, et al.. (2009). Varenicline in the management of smoking cessation: a single technology appraisal. Health Technology Assessment. 13(Suppl 2). 9–13. 32 indexed citations

20.

Karnon, Jonathan, Elizabeth Goyder, Paul Tappenden, et al.. (2007). A review and critique of modelling in prioritising and designing screening programmes. Health Technology Assessment. 11(52). iii–iv, ix. 147 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