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.
This map shows the geographic impact of PharmD'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 PharmD with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites PharmD more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by PharmD. 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 PharmD. The network helps show where PharmD may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of PharmD
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of PharmD.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of PharmD 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 PharmD. PharmD 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.
PharmD, et al.. (2020). The Potential Role of Arginine/Glutamine/Zinc/Copper as Supplemental Immuno-Enhancing Nutrients in Suspected/Infected Sars-Cov-2 Patients.2 indexed citations
2.
Clemmons, Amber B., et al.. (2020). Outcomes for Patients Receiving Ibrutinib with or without Antifungal Therapy.1 indexed citations
3.
PharmD, et al.. (2019). Impact of Intravenous Fluid Shortages on the Time to Antibiotic Administration in the Treatment of Patients with Febrile Neutropenia.1 indexed citations
4.
PharmD, et al.. (2017). Four steps managed care can take to promote antimicrobial stewardship.1 indexed citations
5.
Page, Michael R., et al.. (2015). Review of Amgen Cholesterol Drug Favored by FDA Panel. The American Journal of Managed Care. 21.1 indexed citations
6.
Stewart, David W., PharmD, & Bcps. (2015). Prescribing of Low-Molecular-Weight Heparin and Warfarin in Patients with Acute Venous Thromboembolism and Active Cancer. Journal of Oncology Practice. 4(4). 110–114.1 indexed citations
7.
Fudin, Jeffrey, et al.. (2015). The Economics of Opioids: Abuse, REMS, and Treatment Benefits. The American Journal of Managed Care. 21.1 indexed citations
8.
PharmD, et al.. (2015). Implications of the Extended-Release/Long-Acting Opioid REMS for Managed Care. The American Journal of Managed Care. 21.3 indexed citations
9.
PharmD, et al.. (2015). Adult ADHD: A Review of the Clinical Presentation, Challenges, and Treatment Options. The Psychiatric times. 32(10). 41–41.2 indexed citations
PharmD, et al.. (2006). The Role of Gastroprotection in Patients on NSAID Therapy. The American Journal of Managed Care. 12.1 indexed citations
17.
PharmD, et al.. (2004). Drug Interactions With Azole Antifungals: Focus on Fluconazole and Itraconazole. 44(6). 874–876.1 indexed citations
18.
PharmD, et al.. (2004). Statins and Potentially Interacting Medications: A Managed Care Perspective. The American Journal of Managed Care. 10.1 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.