C. U. M. Smith

52 papers receiving 435 citations

Peers

C. U. M. Smith
Comparison fields: 5 of 92
  • General Psychology 31
  • History and Philosophy of Science 69
  • Neurology 85
  • Physiology 156
  • Psychiatry and Mental health 89
Replace Thomas Parisi with:
Thomas Parisi United States
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal United States
George Berger Netherlands
Dan Lloyd United States
Otello Desiderato United States
Alan H. Harris United States
Philip J. Bersh United States
James Newman United States
Malle A. Tagamets United States
Katherine Makarec Canada
C. U. M. Smith relative to Thomas Parisi United States Thomas Parisi's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×10×13×
Thomas Parisi · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by C. U. M. Smith

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by C. U. M. Smith

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by C. U. M. Smith. 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 C. U. M. Smith. The network helps show where C. U. M. Smith may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 9 scholars most cited alongside C. U. M. Smith, 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 C. U. M. Smith Line = papers co-authored together C. U. M. Smith links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 55 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 199344
2 199331
3 198231
4 200727
5 198223
6
A quantitative analysis of optic nerve axons in elderly control subjects and patients with Alzheimer's disease.
200523
7 199821
8 200617
9 199616
10 199116
11 198714
12 199413
13 197812
14 201011
15 19989
16 19939
17 19969
18 19939
19 19879
20 20088

About C. U. M. Smith

C. U. M. Smith is a scholar working on Cognitive Neuroscience, Physiology, Neurology, History and Philosophy of Science and Philosophy, having authored 55 papers that have together received 470 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Alzheimer's disease research and treatments (9 papers), Neurology and Historical Studies (7 papers), Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research (6 papers), Evolution and Science Education (6 papers), Philosophy and History of Science (4 papers), Memory and Neural Mechanisms (4 papers), Philosophy and Theoretical Science (4 papers) and Neural dynamics and brain function (4 papers). The work is most often cited by research in General Psychology (31 citations), History and Philosophy of Science (69 citations), Neurology (85 citations), Physiology (156 citations) and Psychiatry and Mental health (89 citations). C. U. M. Smith has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom and United States. Frequent co-authors include Richard A. Armstrong, N. J. Cairns, Martin N. Rossor, Philip J. Luthert, Lincoln C. Wood, Nita Lewis Shattuck, Panagiotis Matsangas, Niels Olson and Martin J. Smith. Their work appears in journals such as Journal of the History of the Neurosciences, Journal of the History of Biology, Brain and Cognition, Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders and Perspectives in biology and medicine.

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