Ames Dhai

86 papers receiving 451 citations

Peers

Ames Dhai
Comparison fields: 5 of 94
  • General Health Professions 139
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health 143
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management 46
  • Health 30
  • Research and Theory 2
Replace Sarah E. Connor with:
Sarah E. Connor United States
Veronica Chollette United States
Eileen O’Keefe United States
Mark Heywood Canada
LF Brown Australia
Sarah Robinson United States
JoAnn U. Tsark United States
Jeffrey J. Guidry United States
Sharon Parker Australia
Laura Mkumba United States
Ames Dhai relative to Sarah E. Connor United States Sarah E. Connor's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×4.2×
Sarah E. Connor · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Ames Dhai

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Ames Dhai's research. 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 Ames Dhai with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Ames Dhai more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Ames Dhai

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Ames Dhai. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Ames Dhai. The network helps show where Ames Dhai may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Ames Dhai, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.

Border = papers with Ames Dhai Line = papers co-authored together Ames Dhai links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 91 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 201356
2 202230
3 200524
4 201423
5 200818
6 201316
7 201214
8 201912
9 201612
10 201010
11 201910
12
Confidentiality--a dying wish?
200110
13 20189
14 20119
15 20149
16 20139
17 20138
18 20128
19 20188
20 20127

About Ames Dhai

Ames Dhai is a scholar working on General Health Professions, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Physiology, Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health and Law, having authored 91 papers that have together received 502 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Ethics in medical practice (18 papers), Biomedical Ethics and Regulation (15 papers), Ethics in Clinical Research (15 papers), Ethics and Legal Issues in Pediatric Healthcare (10 papers), Legal Issues in South Africa (9 papers), Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues (8 papers), Human Rights and Development (7 papers) and Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (5 papers). The work is most often cited by research in General Health Professions (139 citations), Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (143 citations), Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management (46 citations), Health (30 citations) and Research and Theory (2 citations). Ames Dhai has collaborated with scholars based in South Africa, United States and Brazil. Frequent co-authors include Eric Friedman, Louis‐Jacques van Bogaert, Lawrence O. Gostin, Jagidesa Moodley, Kent Buse, Christoffel Grobler, Attiya Waris, Harriet Etheredge, Lola Dare and Devi Sridhar. Their work appears in journals such as South African Journal of Bioethics and Law, Developing World Bioethics, South African Medical Journal, Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology and BMC Medical Education.

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 authors with similar magnitude of impact