The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale: validation and United Kingdom norms.

465 indexed citations

Abstract

loading...

About

This paper, published in 1995, received 465 indexed citations. Written by Gerry Humphris, Todd G. Morrison and Stan Lindsay covering the research area of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Psychiatry and Mental health and Oral Surgery. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Oral Surgery (419 citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (226 citations) and Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine (184 citations). Published in PubMed.

In The Last Decade

doi.org/w1935289 →

Countries where authors are citing The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale: validation and United Kingdom norms.

Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale: validation and United Kingdom norms.. 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 The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale: validation and United Kingdom norms. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale: validation and United Kingdom norms. more than expected).

Fields of papers citing The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale: validation and United Kingdom norms.

Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale: validation and United Kingdom norms.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the The Modified Dental Anxiety Scale: validation and United Kingdom norms..

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/w1935289.

Explore hit-papers with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2026