Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.2196/43808 →Countries where authors are citing Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review
This map shows the geographic impact of Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review. 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 Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review
This network shows the impact of Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review.
About Problems and Barriers Related to the Use of Digital Health Applications: Scoping Review
This paper, published in 2023, received 72 indexed citations . Written by Godwin Denk Giebel, Jürgen Wasem and Silke Neusser covering the research area of General Health Professions, Demography and Applied Psychology. It is primarily cited by scholars working on General Health Professions (47 citations), Applied Psychology (24 citations) and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (12 citations). Published in Journal of Medical Internet Research.
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/10.2196/43808.