William Mark Erwin

34 papers receiving 1.3k citations

Peers

William Mark Erwin
Comparison fields: 5 of 87
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine 1.1k
  • Pharmacology 496
  • Surgery 674
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine 112
  • Rheumatology 185
Replace Devina Purmessur with:
Devina Purmessur United States
Markus Kroeber Germany
Robert A. Hartman United States
Jayesh Trivedi United Kingdom
Yoichi Aota Japan
D. C. Jaffray United Kingdom
N Chiverton United Kingdom
Yasuo Kokubo Japan
John C. Y. Leong Hong Kong
Johanna Virri Finland
William Mark Erwin relative to Devina Purmessur United States Devina Purmessur's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×
Devina Purmessur · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by William Mark Erwin

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by William Mark Erwin

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

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

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 34 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2013300
2 2011127
3 2006125
4 2013108
5 2006101
6 201272
7 201264
8 201762
9 201539
10 200832
11 200932
12
The cellular and molecular biology of the intervertebral disc: A clinician's primer.
201432
13 200231
14 202325
15 201823
16 201721
17 200017
18
Chiropractors as Primary Spine Care Providers: precedents and essential measures.
201317
19 202017
20 201616

About William Mark Erwin

William Mark Erwin is a scholar working on Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Pharmacology, Surgery, Rheumatology and Molecular Biology, having authored 34 papers that have together received 1.3k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology (28 papers), Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation (17 papers), Osteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms (6 papers), TGF-β signaling in diseases (4 papers), Shoulder Injury and Treatment (4 papers), Medical Imaging and Analysis (4 papers), Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy (4 papers) and Connective Tissue Growth Factor Research (3 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Pathology and Forensic Medicine (1.1k citations), Pharmacology (496 citations), Surgery (674 citations), Orthopedics and Sports Medicine (112 citations) and Rheumatology (185 citations). William Mark Erwin has collaborated with scholars based in Canada, Switzerland and United States. Frequent co-authors include Robert D. Inman, Michael G. Fehlings, Joseph R. Dettori, Spyridon K. Karadimas, Diana Islam, Ajay Matta, Keith Ashman, Florence W. L. Tsui, David E. Isenman and Greg Kawchuk. Their work appears in journals such as The Spine Journal, Spine, Arthritis Research & Therapy, Scientific Reports and International Journal of Molecular Sciences.

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