Countries where authors publish in Quality in primary care
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Quality in primary care. 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 Quality in primary care with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Quality in primary care more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Quality in primary care
This network shows the impact of papers published in Quality in primary care. 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 Quality in primary care.
About Quality in primary care
The 262 papers published in Quality in primary care in the last decades have received a total of 866 indexed citations . Papers published in Quality in primary care usually cover Health Information Management (34 papers), General Health Professions (133 papers) and Medical Terminology (1 paper) specifically the topics of Primary Care and Health Outcomes (60 papers), Healthcare Quality and Management (29 papers), Healthcare Systems and Technology (25 papers), Clinical practice guidelines implementation (22 papers), Interprofessional Education and Collaboration (21 papers), Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare (19 papers), Innovations in Medical Education (18 papers) and Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare (16 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Quality in primary care are Ruth Chambers, A Niroshan Siriwardena, David Cunningham, Charlotte Williamson, Clare Gerada, Desta Haftu, Abera Kumie, Bikila Lencha, Paul Twomey and Sheila Greenfield.
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.