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.
Central corneal endothelial cell changes over a ten-year period.
1997502 citationsDO Hodge, W. M. Bourne et al.American Journal of Ophthalmologyprofile →
Peers — A (Enhanced Table)
Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late)
cites ·
hero ref
This map shows the geographic impact of W. M. Bourne'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 W. M. Bourne with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites W. M. Bourne more than expected).
This network shows the impact of papers produced by W. M. Bourne. 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 W. M. Bourne. The network helps show where W. M. Bourne may publish in the future.
Co-authorship network of co-authors of W. M. Bourne
This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of W. M. Bourne.
A scholar is included among the top collaborators of W. M. Bourne 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 W. M. Bourne. W. M. Bourne is excluded from
the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.
Baratz, Keith H., et al.. (2007). Wavefront Analysis of the Corneal Surface in Deep Lamellar Keratoplasty versus Penetrating Keratoplasty. 48(13). 3527–3527.2 indexed citations
5.
Hodge, DO, et al.. (2002). Corneal Thickness Measurement: Disagreement between Confocal Microscopy and Ultrasonic Pachometry. 43(13). 145–145.2 indexed citations
6.
Bourne, W. M.. (2001). The effect of long-term contact lens wear on the cells of the cornea.. PubMed. 27(4). 225–30.21 indexed citations
Hodge, DO, et al.. (1997). Central corneal endothelial cell changes over a ten-year period.. American Journal of Ophthalmology. 124(2). 273–274.502 indexed citations breakdown →
9.
Bourne, W. M., Leif R. Nelson, & David O. Hodge. (1997). Central corneal endothelial cell changes over a ten-year period.. PubMed. 38(3). 779–82.277 indexed citations
10.
Bourne, W. M.. (1995). Functional measurements on the enlarged endothelial cells of corneal transplants.. PubMed. 93. 65–79; discussion 79.16 indexed citations
Stein, Raymond, W. M. Bourne, & Thomas J. Liesegang. (1987). Silver nitrate injury to the cornea.. PubMed. 22(5). 279–81.5 indexed citations
18.
Geroski, Dayle H., David B. Glasser, W. M. Bourne, & H. F. Edelhauser. (1986). Morphologic and functional recovery of the cat corneal endothelium following wounding. 69.3 indexed citations
19.
McPhee, Thomas J., W. M. Bourne, & Richard F. Brubaker. (1985). Location of the stress-bearing layers of the cornea.. PubMed. 26(6). 869–72.29 indexed citations
20.
Bourne, W. M., et al.. (1976). Some optical principles of the clinical specular microscope.. PubMed. 15(1). 29–32.47 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.