Read Pierce

510 citations
37 papers · 301 indexed · h-index 10

Read Pierce

35 papers receiving 294 citations

Peers

Read Pierce
Comparison fields: 5 of 72
  • Family Practice 37
  • Research and Theory 10
  • Emergency Medical Services 57
  • Emergency Medicine 73
  • Health Information Management 26
Replace Elizabeth Harry with:
Elizabeth Harry United States
Koen De Meester Belgium
Lauren Toomey United States
Heather Gluyas Australia
Adam Kellogg United States
Fatma Cebeci Türkiye
Kristi Miller United States
Filip Haegdorens Belgium
Gary L. Sculli United States
Connie M. Dekker-van Doorn Netherlands
Read Pierce relative to Elizabeth Harry United States Elizabeth Harry's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.5×
Elizabeth Harry · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Read Pierce

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Read Pierce

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network

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

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
#Work
1 20240
2 20235
3 20214
4 20215
5 20212
6 20213
7 20214
8 20203
9 201927
10 20175
11 201630
12 201525
13 20141
14 201317
15 201314
16 20101
17
Health care technology assessment: implications for modern medical practice. Part II. Decision making on technology adoption.
20073
18 200724
19
Health care technology assessment: implications for modern medical practice. Part I. Understanding technology adoption and analyses.
20071
20 19747

About Read Pierce

Read Pierce is a scholar working on Family Practice, Research and Theory, Emergency Medicine, Medical Laboratory Technology and Health Information Management, having authored 37 papers that have together received 301 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Hospital Admissions and Outcomes (7 papers), Innovations in Medical Education (7 papers), Healthcare Policy and Management (6 papers), Primary Care and Health Outcomes (6 papers), Patient Safety and Medication Errors (4 papers), Healthcare professionals’ stress and burnout (4 papers), Emergency and Acute Care Studies (3 papers) and Healthcare cost, quality, practices (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Family Practice (37 citations), Research and Theory (10 citations), Emergency Medical Services (57 citations), Emergency Medicine (73 citations) and Health Information Management (26 citations). Read Pierce has collaborated with scholars based in United States, Israel and Argentina. Frequent co-authors include Christine D. Jones, Patrick Kneeland, Kevin J. Bozic, Jeffrey J. Glasheen, David S. Bradford, Jonathan Pell, Mary E. Anderson, Gurpreet Dhaliwal, Hemali Patel and Heidi L. Wald. Their work appears in journals such as Journal of Hospital Medicine, American Journal of Medical Quality, Academic Medicine, The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety and Journal of General Internal Medicine.

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