Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study
- Journal
- JMIR mhealth and uhealth
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.2196/19857 →Countries where authors are citing Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study
This map shows the geographic impact of Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study. 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 Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study
This network shows the impact of Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study.
About Acceptability of App-Based Contact Tracing for COVID-19: Cross-Country Survey Study
This paper, published in 2020, received 269 indexed citations . Written by Samuel Altmann, Luke Milsom, Hannah Zillessen, Frederic Gerdon, Ruben L. Bach, Frauke Kreuter, Daniele Nosenzo, Séverine Toussaert and Johannes Abeler covering the research area of Epidemiology, Sociology and Political Science and Information Systems. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Information Systems (224 citations), Sociology and Political Science (181 citations) and General Health Professions (93 citations). Published in JMIR mhealth and uhealth.
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/10.2196/19857.