William H. Shapiro

2.4k total citations
57 papers, 1.7k citations indexed

About

William H. Shapiro is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Sensory Systems and Speech and Hearing. According to data from OpenAlex, William H. Shapiro has authored 57 papers receiving a total of 1.7k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 48 papers in Cognitive Neuroscience, 21 papers in Sensory Systems and 8 papers in Speech and Hearing. Recurrent topics in William H. Shapiro's work include Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation (48 papers), Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics (21 papers) and Noise Effects and Management (8 papers). William H. Shapiro is often cited by papers focused on Hearing Loss and Rehabilitation (48 papers), Hearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics (21 papers) and Noise Effects and Management (8 papers). William H. Shapiro collaborates with scholars based in United States, Australia and Serbia. William H. Shapiro's co-authors include Susan B. Waltzman, J. Thomas Roland, Noel L. Cohen, David R. Friedmann, N. L. Cohen, Maura K. Cosetti, Ronald A. Hoffman, Sean O. McMenomey, Anil K. Lalwani and George Alexiades and has published in prestigious journals such as Journal of neurosurgery, American Journal of Neuroradiology and The Laryngoscope.

In The Last Decade

William H. Shapiro

55 papers receiving 1.6k citations

Peers

William H. Shapiro

OTORH

Kevin D. Brown United States

Thomas Wesarg Germany

Douglas P. Sladen United States

Frederike Hassepaß Germany

Annelle V. Hodges United States

Anke Lesinski‐Schiedat Germany

Aaron C. Moberly United States

Il Joon Moon South Korea

Margaret T. Dillon United States

Deborah Mawman United Kingdom

Kevin D. Brown United States

William H. Shapiro

1.6k ×1.1

1.3k ×1.3

720 ×1.7

313 ×1.1

OTORH

158 ×0.7

Citations per year, relative to William H. Shapiro William H. Shapiro (= 1×) peers Kevin D. Brown

Countries citing papers authored by William H. Shapiro

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by William H. Shapiro

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by William H. Shapiro. 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 William H. Shapiro. The network helps show where William H. Shapiro may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of William H. Shapiro

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of William H. Shapiro. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of William H. Shapiro 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 William H. Shapiro. William H. Shapiro 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

Choi, Yeonjoo, et al.. (2025). Cochlear Implants and the Aided Audiogram: A Retrospective Study Comparing Performance Across Device Manufacturers. Audiology Research. 15(4). 79–79.

Dunn, Camille C., Teresa A. Zwolan, Thomas J. Bałkany, et al.. (2024). A Consensus to Revise the Minimum Speech Test Battery–Version 3. American Journal of Audiology. 33(3). 624–647. 11 indexed citations

Landsberger, David M., Emily R. Spitzer, Susan B. Waltzman, et al.. (2022). Stimulating the Cochlear Apex Without Longer Electrodes: Preliminary Results With a New Approach. Otology & Neurotology. 43(5). e578–e581. 4 indexed citations

Kay‐Rivest, Emily, Sean O. McMenomey, Daniel Jethanamest, et al.. (2022). Predictive Value of Transimpedance Matrix Measurements to Detect Electrode Tip Foldover. Otology & Neurotology. 43(9). 1027–1032. 13 indexed citations

Shapiro, William H., et al.. (2021). Assessing temporal responsiveness of primary stimulated neurons in auditory brainstem and cochlear implant users. Hearing Research. 401. 108163–108163. 3 indexed citations

Deep, Nicholas L., William H. Shapiro, Susan B. Waltzman, et al.. (2020). Cochlear Implant Outcomes in Neurofibromatosis Type 2: Implications for Management. Otology & Neurotology. 42(4). 540–548. 13 indexed citations

Ahmed, Omar, et al.. (2018). Validity of the Hum Test, a Simple and Reliable Alternative to the Weber Test. Annals of Otology Rhinology & Laryngology. 127(6). 402–405. 6 indexed citations

Friedmann, David R., et al.. (2018). Performance with an Auditory Brainstem Implant and Contralateral Cochlear Implant in Pediatric Patients. Audiology and Neurotology. 23(4). 216–221. 9 indexed citations

Fang, Yixin, et al.. (2017). The value of intraoperative EABRs in auditory brainstem implantation. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 101. 158–163. 10 indexed citations

10.

Cosetti, Maura K., David R. Friedmann, Selena E. Heman‐Ackah, et al.. (2013). The Effects of Residual Hearing in Traditional Cochlear Implant Candidates After Implantation With a Conventional Electrode. Otology & Neurotology. 34(3). 516–521. 53 indexed citations

11.

Shapiro, William H., et al.. (2011). Cochlear Implant Programming. Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America. 45(1). 111–127. 56 indexed citations

12.

Fitzgerald, Matthew B., Elad Sagi, Michael Jackson, et al.. (2008). Reimplantation of Hybrid Cochlear Implant Users With a Full-Length Electrode After Loss of Residual Hearing. Otology & Neurotology. 29(2). 168–173. 59 indexed citations

13.

Fitzgerald, Matthew B., William H. Shapiro, Heidi S. Neuburger, et al.. (2007). The effect of perimodiolar placement on speech perception and frequency discrimination by cochlear implant users. Acta Oto-Laryngologica. 127(4). 378–383. 40 indexed citations

14.

Lin, Karen, Michelle S. Marrinan, William H. Shapiro, Margaret A. Kenna, & Noel L. Cohen. (2005). Combined Microtia and Aural Atresia: Issues in Cochlear Implantation. The Laryngoscope. 115(1). 39–43. 8 indexed citations

15.

Battmer, R.-D., Norbert Dillier, Wai Kong Lai, et al.. (2004). Evaluation of the Neural Response Telemetry (NRT) capabilities of the Nucleus Research Platform 8: initial results from the NRT trial. International Journal of Audiology. 43(sup1). S10–5. 20 indexed citations

16.

Kanowitz, Seth J., William H. Shapiro, John G. Golfinos, Noel L. Cohen, & J. Thomas Roland. (2004). Auditory Brainstem Implantation in Patients with Neurofibromatosis Type 2. The Laryngoscope. 114(12). 2135–2146. 50 indexed citations

17.

Roland, J. Thomas, George Alexiades, Alexis H. Jackman, Dean E. Hillman, & William H. Shapiro. (2003). Cochlear Implantation in Human Immunodeficiency Virus–Infected Patients. Otology & Neurotology. 24(6). 892–895. 19 indexed citations

18.

Saunders, Elaine, Lawrence T. Cohen, Antje Aschendorff, et al.. (2002). Threshold, Comfortable Level and Impedance Changes as a Function of Electrode-Modiolar Distance. Ear and Hearing. 23(Supplement). 28S–40S. 166 indexed citations

19.

Alexiades, George, J. Thomas Roland, Andrew J. Fishman, et al.. (2001). Cochlear Reimplantation: Surgical Techniques and Functional Results. The Laryngoscope. 111(9). 1608–1613. 92 indexed citations

20.

Waltzman, Susan B., et al.. (1997). Perception and Production Results in Children Implanted between 2 and 5 Years of Age. Advances in oto-rhino-laryngology. 52. 177–180. 13 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