Anna Good

968 citations
14 papers · 718 · h-index 11

Impact in

    • Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Oncology top 10%
    • Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
    • Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection

Papers in

Anna Good

13 papers receiving 699 citations

Peers

Anna Good
Comparison fields: 5 of 85
  • Applied Psychology 160
  • Oncology 341
  • General Health Professions 265
  • Health 73
  • Literature and Literary Theory 59
Replace Tabetha A. Brockman with:
Tabetha A. Brockman United States
Dawn Schroeder Canada
Ann K. Sandgren United States
Linda Mowad United States
Wendy Nelson United States
Patricia Chalela United States
Helene McDowell United States
Henk Boer Netherlands
Alejandra Hurtado‐de‐Mendoza United States
Belinda C. Goodwin Australia
Anna Good relative to Tabetha A. Brockman United States Tabetha A. Brockman's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.5×2.4×
Tabetha A. Brockman · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Anna Good

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Anna Good

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Anna Good. 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 Anna Good. The network helps show where Anna Good may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 24 scholars most cited alongside Anna Good, 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 Anna Good Line = papers co-authored together Anna Good links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

14 of 14 papers shown
#Work
1 2009198
2 2011137
3 200980
4 200770
5 201756
6 201155
7 201131
8 201131
9 201325
10 201212
11 201411
12 20107
13 20205
14 20210

About Anna Good

Anna Good is a scholar working on Applied Psychology, General Health Professions, Sociology and Political Science, Oncology and Literature and Literary Theory, having authored 14 papers that have together received 718 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Behavioral Health and Interventions (7 papers), Global Cancer Incidence and Screening (3 papers), Media Influence and Health (3 papers), Psychological and Temporal Perspectives Research (2 papers), Patient-Provider Communication in Healthcare (2 papers), Social and Intergroup Psychology (2 papers), Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection (2 papers) and Health disparities and outcomes (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Applied Psychology (160 citations), Oncology (341 citations), General Health Professions (265 citations), Health (73 citations) and Literature and Literary Theory (59 citations). Anna Good has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, Australia and United States. Frequent co-authors include Christian von Wagner, Jane Wardle, Charles Abraham, Claudia Semmler, Katriina L. Whitaker, Austin Obichere, Stuart Bloom, Bernard Rachet, D. J. Wright and Peter R. Harris. Their work appears in journals such as Health Psychology, Journal of Applied Biobehavioral Research, Journal of Cancer Survivorship, Psychology and Health and Epidemiologic Reviews.

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