Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice

1.6k indexed citations

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 2004, received 1.6k indexed citations. Written by Gillian Lancaster, Susanna Dodd and Paula Williamson covering the research area of Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Economics and Econometrics and Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty. It is primarily cited by scholars working on General Health Professions (304 citations), Clinical Psychology (269 citations) and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (246 citations). Published in Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice.

Countries where authors are citing Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice

Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice. 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 Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice more than expected).

Fields of papers citing Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice

Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice.

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.

This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1111/j..2002.384.doc.x.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026