Crossing the quality chasm: implications for health services administration education.
- Journal
- PubMed
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w74258864 →Countries where authors are citing Crossing the quality chasm: implications for health services administration education.
This map shows the geographic impact of Crossing the quality chasm: implications for health services administration education.. 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 Crossing the quality chasm: implications for health services administration education. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Crossing the quality chasm: implications for health services administration education. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Crossing the quality chasm: implications for health services administration education.
This network shows the impact of Crossing the quality chasm: implications for health services administration education.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Crossing the quality chasm: implications for health services administration education..
About Crossing the quality chasm: implications for health services administration education.
This paper, published in 2004, received 764 indexed citations . Written by Bernard J. Horak and Stephen M. Shortell covering the research area of Health Information Management. It is primarily cited by scholars working on General Health Professions (421 citations), Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (163 citations) and Economics and Econometrics (160 citations). Published in PubMed.
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/w74258864.