William J. Ott

826 total citations
24 papers, 570 citations indexed

About

William J. Ott is a scholar working on Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health, Obstetrics and Gynecology and Surgery. According to data from OpenAlex, William J. Ott has authored 24 papers receiving a total of 570 indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 19 papers in Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health, 14 papers in Obstetrics and Gynecology and 4 papers in Surgery. Recurrent topics in William J. Ott's work include Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies (14 papers), Birth, Development, and Health (10 papers) and Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics (6 papers). William J. Ott is often cited by papers focused on Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies (14 papers), Birth, Development, and Health (10 papers) and Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics (6 papers). William J. Ott collaborates with scholars based in United States, Czechia and Mexico. William J. Ott's co-authors include Kutay Taysi, Shiraz Sunderji and Fernando Arias and has published in prestigious journals such as American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology and Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey.

In The Last Decade

William J. Ott

24 papers receiving 534 citations

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

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

Name	h						Papers	Cites
William J. Ott United States	11	405	359	144	139	96	24	570
Harbinder S. Brar United States	12	372 0.9×	379 1.1×	93 0.6×	153 1.1×	29 0.3×	15	531
Monique W. M. de Laat Netherlands	12	310 0.8×	285 0.8×	131 0.9×	182 1.3×	158 1.6×	25	527
S. Turan United States	11	466 1.2×	408 1.1×	160 1.1×	131 0.9×	91 0.9×	30	629
Anita Connelly Australia	7	390 1.0×	407 1.1×	46 0.3×	111 0.8×	38 0.4×	8	514
Paul Reuwer Netherlands	13	282 0.7×	348 1.0×	31 0.2×	77 0.6×	47 0.5×	24	487
Roger B. Newman United States	8	350 0.9×	236 0.7×	60 0.4×	51 0.4×	43 0.4×	9	453
Arthur Zaltz Canada	14	325 0.8×	320 0.9×	84 0.6×	116 0.8×	59 0.6×	35	488
C. M. COOK Australia	8	255 0.6×	254 0.7×	38 0.3×	94 0.7×	41 0.4×	13	366
Richard A. Pircon United States	12	188 0.5×	91 0.3×	72 0.5×	94 0.7×	30 0.3×	17	326
Seizo Miyadahira Brazil	10	278 0.7×	168 0.5×	50 0.3×	143 1.0×	252 2.6×	49	516

Countries citing papers authored by William J. Ott

Since Specialization

Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by William J. Ott

Since Specialization

Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authorship network of co-authors of William J. Ott

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

1.

Ott, William J.. (2012). Development of a fetal risk assessment score for the prediction of neonatal outcome in the growth-restricted fetus. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine. 25(10). 1941–1944. 4 indexed citations

2.

Ott, William J.. (2006). Sonographic Diagnosis of Fetal Growth Restriction. Clinical Obstetrics & Gynecology. 49(2). 295–307. 34 indexed citations

3.

Ott, William J.. (2005). Reevaluation of the relationship between amniotic fluid volume and perinatal outcome. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 192(6). 1803–1809. 65 indexed citations

4.

Ott, William J.. (2005). An update in the ultrasonic diagnosis and evaluation of intrauterine growth restriction. 5(2). 111–124. 3 indexed citations

5.

Ott, William J.. (2003). Middle cerebral artery blood flow in the fetus and central nervous system complications in the neonate. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine. 14(1). 26–29. 6 indexed citations

6.

Ott, William J.. (2003). Middle cerebral artery blood flow in the fetus and central nervous system complications in the neonate. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine. 14(1). 26–29. 1 indexed citations

7.

Ott, William J.. (2002). Diagnosis of Intrauterine Growth Restriction: Comparison of Ultrasound Parameters. American Journal of Perinatology. 19(3). 133–138. 44 indexed citations

8.

Ott, William J. & Kutay Taysi. (2001). Obstetric ultrasonographic findings and fetal chromosomal abnormalities: Refining the association. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 184(7). 1414–1421. 10 indexed citations

9.

Ott, William J.. (1999). Comparison of the non‐stress test with the evaluation of centralization of blood flow for the prediction of neonatal compromise. Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 14(1). 38–41. 11 indexed citations

10.

Ott, William J.. (1999). Clinical obstetrical ultrasound. Medical Entomology and Zoology. 3 indexed citations

11.

Ott, William J., et al.. (1998). Comparison of the modified biophysical profile to a “new” biophysical profile incorporating the middle cerebral artery to umbilical artery velocity flow systolic/diastolic ratio. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 178(6). 1346–1353. 23 indexed citations

12.

Ott, William J.. (1997). Sonographic Diagnosis of Intrauterine Growth Restriction. Clinical Obstetrics & Gynecology. 40(4). 787–795. 12 indexed citations

13.

Ott, William J.. (1995). The accuracy of antenatal fetal echocardiography screening in high- and low-risk patients. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 172(6). 1741–1749. 82 indexed citations

14.

Ott, William J.. (1995). Accurate Gestational Dating. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 50(5). 336–337. 2 indexed citations

15.

Ott, William J.. (1993). Intrauterine growth retardation and preterm delivery. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology. 168(6). 1710–1717. 131 indexed citations

16.

Ott, William J.. (1990). Comparison of dynamic image and pulsed Doppler ultrasonography for the diagnosis of intrauterine growth retardation. Journal of Clinical Ultrasound. 18(1). 3–7. 7 indexed citations

17.

Ott, William J.. (1985). Acute polyhydramnios and a fetal ovarian cyst.. PubMed. 30(11). 887–9. 8 indexed citations

18.

Ott, William J.. (1984). Use of Ultrasonic Fetal Head Circumference for Predicting Expected Date of Confinement. Journal of Clinical Ultrasound. 12(7). 411–415. 9 indexed citations

19.

Ott, William J.. (1982). Relationship of Normal and Abnormal Late Labor Patterns to Perinatal Mortality. Clinical Obstetrics & Gynecology. 25(1). 105–109. 1 indexed citations

20.

Ott, William J.. (1976). THE CURRENT STATUS OF INTRAPARTUM FETAL MONITORING. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 31(5). 339–364. 7 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