Danielle D’Lima

590 citations
16 papers · 263 · h-index 7

Impact in

Papers in

Danielle D’Lima

12 papers receiving 256 citations

Peers

Danielle D’Lima
Comparison fields: 5 of 77
  • Pharmacy 30
  • Emergency Medical Services 39
  • General Health Professions 127
  • Clinical Psychology 84
  • Family Practice 6
Replace Kia Skrine Jeffers with:
Kia Skrine Jeffers United States
Stephen Swensen United States
Rinchen Pelzang Australia
Yoshikazu Fujisawa Japan
Aghil Habibi Soola Iran
Gillian Janes United Kingdom
Jayne Hewitt Australia
Fabiana Rosa Neves Smiderle Brazil
Gillian Walsh Ireland
Ailsa Donnelly United Kingdom
Danielle D’Lima relative to Kia Skrine Jeffers United States Kia Skrine Jeffers's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.3×
Kia Skrine Jeffers · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Danielle D’Lima

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Danielle D’Lima

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Danielle D’Lima. 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 Danielle D’Lima. The network helps show where Danielle D’Lima may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Danielle D’Lima, 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 Danielle D’Lima Line = papers co-authored together Danielle D’Lima links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

16 of 16 papers shown
#Work
1 202086
2 201982
3 201740
4 201922
5 201611
6 20226
7 20226
8 20234
9 20232
10 20251
11 20231
12 20021
13 20201
14 20230
15 20250
16 20250

About Danielle D’Lima

Danielle D’Lima is a scholar working on General Health Professions, Pharmacy, Economics and Econometrics, Clinical Psychology and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, having authored 16 papers that have together received 263 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Health Policy Implementation Science (5 papers), Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues (3 papers), Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (3 papers), Patient Safety and Medication Errors (3 papers), Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints (3 papers), Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes (2 papers), Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation (2 papers) and Behavioral Health and Interventions (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Pharmacy (30 citations), Emergency Medical Services (39 citations), General Health Professions (127 citations), Clinical Psychology (84 citations) and Family Practice (6 citations). Danielle D’Lima has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, Australia and Kuwait. Frequent co-authors include Rachel Davis, Lindsay H. Dewa, Stephanie Archer, Ara Darzi, Sheila Adam, Hutan Ashrafian, Stephen Morris, Emma Hudson, Naomi Fulop and Simon Turner. Their work appears in journals such as BMJ Open, Implementation Science, Appetite, Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy and BMC Health Services Research.

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