Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing

291 papers and 3.9k indexed citations i.

About

The 291 papers published in Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing in the last decades have received a total of 3.9k indexed citations. Papers published in Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing usually cover General Health Professions (111 papers), Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (55 papers) and Clinical Psychology (29 papers) specifically the topics of Health Sciences Research and Education (27 papers), Nursing Roles and Practices (24 papers) and Clinical practice guidelines implementation (18 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing are Francine Cheater, Allison Worth, Martin Johnson, Tony Long, Roger Watson, Julie Jomeen, Anne Mulhall, S. José Closs, Rosamund Bryar and Patricia Lyne.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing.

Countries where authors publish in Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing. 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 papers published in Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing more than expected).

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.

Explore journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025