Sarah Dean

6.9k total citations · 1 hit paper
132 papers, 4.3k citations indexed

About

Sarah Dean is a scholar working on General Health Professions, Pharmacology and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health. According to data from OpenAlex, Sarah Dean has authored 132 papers receiving a total of 4.3k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 40 papers in General Health Professions, 31 papers in Pharmacology and 29 papers in Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health. Recurrent topics in Sarah Dean's work include Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation (31 papers), Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery (23 papers) and Pelvic floor disorders treatments (18 papers). Sarah Dean is often cited by papers focused on Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation (31 papers), Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery (23 papers) and Pelvic floor disorders treatments (18 papers). Sarah Dean collaborates with scholars based in United Kingdom, New Zealand and Australia. Sarah Dean's co-authors include Richard J. Siegert, William Levack, David Baxter, Ben Darlow, Kathryn McPherson, Anthony Dowell, Mark Weatherall, Jean Hay‐Smith, Meredith Perry and Fiona Mathieson and has published in prestigious journals such as SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología, Scientific Reports and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

In The Last Decade

Sarah Dean

125 papers receiving 4.2k citations

Hit Papers

align trajectories

What are hit papers?

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.

The association between health care professional attitudes and beliefs and the attitudes and beliefs, clinical management, and outcomes of patients with low back pain: A systematic review

2011 347 citations Sarah Dean et al. profile →

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
Sarah Dean United Kingdom	37	1.0k	992	776	652	624	132	4.3k
Denise G. Tate United States	39	458 0.5×	546 0.6×	1.3k 1.7×	890 1.4×	827 1.3×	164	5.0k
M.H.M. Janssen United Kingdom	2	577 0.6×	1.2k 1.2×	781 1.0×	266 0.4×	533 0.9×	2	6.2k
Christoph Gutenbrünner Germany	33	495 0.5×	671 0.7×	962 1.2×	544 0.8×	337 0.5×	266	4.2k
Anne M. Moseley Australia	34	1.4k 1.4×	717 0.7×	1.8k 2.3×	1.6k 2.4×	719 1.2×	89	8.8k
Rose Galvin Ireland	40	421 0.4×	806 0.8×	1.1k 1.5×	872 1.3×	619 1.0×	234	5.6k
Basia Belza United States	36	283 0.3×	889 0.9×	1.1k 1.4×	342 0.5×	629 1.0×	137	4.7k
Shannon L. Mihalko United States	33	461 0.5×	531 0.5×	593 0.8×	331 0.5×	606 1.0×	66	4.8k
Ross Wilkie United Kingdom	31	1.2k 1.2×	541 0.5×	697 0.9×	247 0.4×	196 0.3×	75	2.7k
Harriët Wittink Netherlands	33	1.2k 1.2×	393 0.4×	845 1.1×	489 0.8×	381 0.6×	120	3.5k
Alessandro Chiarotto Netherlands	26	3.0k 3.0×	651 0.7×	1.2k 1.5×	277 0.4×	612 1.0×	121	5.3k

Countries citing papers authored by Sarah Dean

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Sarah Dean

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Sarah Dean

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Sarah Dean. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Sarah Dean 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 Sarah Dean. Sarah Dean 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

Jones, Matthew D., Harrison J Hansford, Nadine E. Foster, et al.. (2025). Exercise adherence is associated with improvements in pain intensity and functional limitations in adults with chronic non-specific low back pain: a secondary analysis of a Cochrane review. Journal of physiotherapy. 71(2). 91–99. 2 indexed citations

Dean, Sarah, et al.. (2025). Navigating blinding challenges in complex intervention trials: insights from a UK researcher survey. Trials. 26(1). 501–501.

Simpson, Sharon, Rachael A Evans, Shaun Barber, et al.. (2024). Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM): protocol for a randomised feasibility trial. BMJ Open. 14(4). e083255–e083255. 2 indexed citations

Wood, Lianne, Nadine E. Foster, Sarah Dean, et al.. (2024). Contexts, behavioural mechanisms and outcomes to optimise therapeutic exercise prescription for persistent low back pain: a realist review. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 58(4). 222–230. 6 indexed citations

Hay-Smith, E. Jean C., Mark Pearson, & Sarah Dean. (2023). ‘Making sense’ of urinary incontinence: A qualitative study investigating women’s pelvic floor muscle training adherence. Repository@Hull (Worktribe) (University of Hull). 51(1). 1 indexed citations

Dean, Sarah, et al.. (2023). Perception-Based Sampled-Data Optimization of Dynamical Systems. IFAC-PapersOnLine. 56(2). 5083–5088. 1 indexed citations

Gaboury, Isabelle, Michel Tousignant, Hélène Corriveau, et al.. (2021). Effects of Telerehabilitation on Patient Adherence to a Rehabilitation Plan: Protocol for a Mixed Methods Trial. JMIR Research Protocols. 10(10). e32134–e32134. 7 indexed citations

Tarrant, Mark, Sarah Dean, Rod S Taylor, et al.. (2021). Singing for people with aphasia (SPA): results of a pilot feasibility randomised controlled trial of a group singing intervention investigating acceptability and feasibility. BMJ Open. 11(1). e040544–e040544. 19 indexed citations

Dean, Sarah, Jean Hay‐Smith, Carol Bugge, et al.. (2019). A process evaluation study investigating fidelity and dose of intervention delivery and uptake of pelvic floor muscle training delivered in a randomised controlled trial. Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter). 1 indexed citations

10.

Hagen, Suzanne, Andrew Elders, Lorna Henderson, et al.. (2019). Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of biofeedback-assisted pelvic floor muscle training for female urinary incontinence: a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter). 1 indexed citations

11.

Bugge, Carol, Jean Hay‐Smith, Aileen Grant, et al.. (2019). A 24 month longitudinal qualitative study of women's experience of electromyography biofeedback pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) and PFMT alone for urinary incontinence: adherence, outcome and context.. Open Research Exeter (University of Exeter). 1 indexed citations

12.

Campbell, John, Emily Fletcher, Gary Abel, et al.. (2019). Policies and strategies to retain and support the return of experienced GPs in direct patient care: the ReGROUP mixed-methods study. SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología. 7(14). 1–288. 21 indexed citations

13.

Grant, Aileen, Sarah Dean, Jean Hay‐Smith, et al.. (2019). Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness randomised controlled trial of basic versus biofeedback-mediated intensive pelvic floor muscle training for female stress or mixed urinary incontinence: protocol for the OPAL (optimising pelvic floor exercises to achieve long-term benefits) trial mixed methods longitudinal qualitative case study and process evaluation. BMJ Open. 9(2). e024152–e024152. 5 indexed citations

14.

Sansom, Anna, Rohini Terry, Emily Fletcher, et al.. (2018). Why do GPs leave direct patient care and what might help to retain them? A qualitative study of GPs in South West England. BMJ Open. 8(1). e019849–e019849. 32 indexed citations

15.

Dean, Sarah, Leon Poltawski, Anne Förster, et al.. (2018). Community-based rehabilitation training after stroke: results of a pilot randomised controlled trial (ReTrain) investigating acceptability and feasibility. BMJ Open. 8(2). e018409–e018409. 35 indexed citations

16.

Tarrant, Mark, Krystal Warmoth, Chris Code, et al.. (2016). Creating psychological connections between intervention recipients: development and focus group evaluation of a group singing session for people with aphasia. BMJ Open. 6(2). e009652–e009652. 45 indexed citations

17.

Poltawski, Leon, Anne Förster, Victoria A Goodwin, et al.. (2013). Informing the design of a randomised controlled trial of an exercise-based programme for long term stroke survivors: lessons from a before-and-after case series study. BMC Research Notes. 6(1). 324–324. 7 indexed citations

18.

Dean, Sarah, Richard J. Siegert, & William J. Taylor. (2012). Interprofessional rehabilitation : a person-centred approach. Wiley-Blackwell eBooks. 19 indexed citations

19.

Dean, Sarah, et al.. (2008). Patient and clinician perceptions of asthma education and management in resistant asthma: a qualitative study. ePrints Soton (University of Southampton). 5 indexed citations

20.

Sinnott, Anne & Sarah Dean. (2005). Choosing appropriate measures in inpatient rehabilitation. British Journal of Hospital Medicine. 66(4). 205–209. 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