Doug Altman
Impact in
- Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty top 0.02%
- Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Obstetrics and Gynecology top 0.2%
Papers in
-
- Meta-analysis and systematic reviews 28
-
- Healthcare cost, quality, practices 3
- Mental Health and Patient Involvement 3
- Co-authors
- David Moher (13 shared papers)Peter C Gøtzsche (3 shared papers)Kenneth F. Schulz (4 shared papers)Andrew D Oxman (2 shared papers)Peter Jüni (4 shared papers)Jonathan A C Sterne (3 shared papers)Jelena Savović (2 shared papers)Julian P. T. Higgins (1 shared paper)
- Journals
- Trials (13 papers)BMJ (7 papers)BMJ Open (3 papers)PLoS ONE (3 papers)Health Technology Assessment (2 papers)
- Partner nations
- United KingdomCanadaUnited States
In The Last Decade
Doug Altman
92 papers receiving 65.0k citations
Doug Altman's Hit Papers
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 231
- Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty 2.7k
- Obstetrics and Gynecology 1.3k
- Psychiatry and Mental health 2.5k
- Surgery 7.2k
- Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine 743
Countries citing papers authored by Doug Altman
This map shows the geographic impact of Doug Altman'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 Doug Altman with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Doug Altman more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Doug Altman
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Doug Altman. 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 Doug Altman. The network helps show where Doug Altman may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 25 scholars most cited alongside Doug Altman, linked wherever they have co-authored with each other. Click a name or a connecting line to browse the papers they share.
All Works
Showing the 20 most-cited of 93 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials Hit paper breakdown → | 2011 | 27021 |
| 2 | The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration Hit paper breakdown → | 2009 | 14810 |
| 3 | CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials Hit paper breakdown → | 2010 | 6725 |
| 4 | Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni method Hit paper breakdown → | 1995 | 2957 |
| 5 | International standards for newborn weight, length, and head circumference by gestational age and sex: the Newborn Cross-Sectional Study of the INTERGROWTH-21st Project Hit paper breakdown → | 2014 | 1487 |
| 6 | Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement Hit paper breakdown → | 2008 | 1256 |
| 7 | GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research Hit paper breakdown → | 2017 | 1121 |
| 8 | Prognosis and prognostic research: validating a prognostic model Hit paper breakdown → | 2009 | 1066 |
| 9 | GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research Hit paper breakdown → | 2017 | 1056 |
| 10 | Prognosis and prognostic research: Developing a prognostic model Hit paper breakdown → | 2009 | 884 |
| 11 | The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews Hit paper breakdown → | 2010 | 791 |
| 12 | Survival probabilities (the Kaplan-Meier method) Hit paper breakdown → | 1998 | 595 |
| 13 | Survival Analysis Part II: Multivariate data analysis – an introduction to concepts and methods Hit paper breakdown → | 2003 | 504 |
| 14 | Small study effects in meta-analyses of osteoarthritis trials: meta-epidemiological study Hit paper breakdown → | 2010 | 465 |
| 15 | 1994 | 416 | |
| 16 | External validation of clinical prediction models using big datasets from e-health records or IPD meta-analysis: opportunities and challenges Hit paper breakdown → | 2016 | 358 |
| 17 | Prognosis research strategy (PROGRESS) 4: Stratified medicine research Hit paper breakdown → | 2013 | 350 |
| 18 | 2010 | 347 | |
| 19 | 2010 | 341 | |
| 20 | 2009 | 313 |
About Doug Altman
Doug Altman is a scholar working on Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty, General Health Professions, Economics and Econometrics, Sociology and Political Science and Epidemiology, having authored 93 papers that have together received 66.0k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Meta-analysis and systematic reviews (28 papers), Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (13 papers), Delphi Technique in Research (10 papers), Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials (6 papers), Clinical practice guidelines implementation (4 papers), Healthcare cost, quality, practices (3 papers), Mental Health and Patient Involvement (3 papers) and Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty (2.7k citations), Obstetrics and Gynecology (1.3k citations), Psychiatry and Mental health (2.5k citations), Surgery (7.2k citations) and Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine (743 citations). Doug Altman has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, Canada and United States. Frequent co-authors include David Moher, Peter C Gøtzsche, Kenneth F. Schulz, Andrew D Oxman, Peter Jüni, Jonathan A C Sterne, Jelena Savović, Julian P. T. Higgins, Laura Weeks and P.J. Devereaux. Their work appears in journals such as Trials, BMJ, BMJ Open, PLoS ONE and Health Technology Assessment.
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.