Les Irwig
Impact in
-
- Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Oncology top 0.2%
- Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
- Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
Papers in
- Oncology 72
- Global Cancer Incidence and Screening 41
- Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection 33
- Epidemiology 34
- Cervical Cancer and HPV Research 20
- Co-authors
- Petra Macaskill (68 shared papers)Paul Glasziou (59 shared papers)Jonathan J Deeks (2 shared papers)Patrick M. Bossuyt (22 shared papers)Henrica C. W. de Vet (19 shared papers)Constantine Gatsonis (16 shared papers)Johannes B. Reitsma (15 shared papers)David E. Bruns (15 shared papers)
- Journals
- The Medical Journal of Australia (22 papers)Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (16 papers)BMJ Open (9 papers)The Lancet (7 papers)The Breast (6 papers)
- Partner nations
- AustraliaUnited StatesUnited Kingdom
In The Last Decade
Les Irwig
280 papers receiving 26.7k citations
Les Irwig's Hit Papers
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 207
- Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty 1.4k
- Oncology 4.4k
- Cancer Research 1.9k
- Family Practice 211
- Health Informatics 169
Countries citing papers authored by Les Irwig
This map shows the geographic impact of Les Irwig'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 Les Irwig with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Les Irwig more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Les Irwig
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Les Irwig. 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 Les Irwig. The network helps show where Les Irwig may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 25 scholars most cited alongside Les Irwig, 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 285 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed Hit paper breakdown → | 2005 | 2388 |
| 2 | STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies Hit paper breakdown → | 2015 | 2309 |
| 3 | STARD 2015 guidelines for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies: explanation and elaboration Hit paper breakdown → | 2016 | 1674 |
| 4 | A comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta‐analysis Hit paper breakdown → | 2001 | 992 |
| 5 | STARD 2015: An Updated List of Essential Items for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies Hit paper breakdown → | 2015 | 977 |
| 6 | Cochrane Systematic Review of Colorectal Cancer Screening Using the Fecal Occult Blood Test (Hemoccult): An Update Hit paper breakdown → | 2008 | 766 |
| 7 | STARD 2015: An Updated List of Essential Items for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies Hit paper breakdown → | 2015 | 726 |
| 8 | Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy. Hit paper breakdown → | 2003 | 704 |
| 9 | Guidelines for Meta-analyses Evaluating Diagnostic Tests Hit paper breakdown → | 1994 | 656 |
| 10 | A systematic review of the effects of screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult Hit paper breakdown → | 1998 | 651 |
| 11 | Accuracy and Surgical Impact of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Breast Cancer Staging: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis in Detection of Multifocal and Multicentric Cancer Hit paper breakdown → | 2008 | 621 |
| 12 | Screening for colorectal cancer using the faecal occult blood test, Hemoccult Hit paper breakdown → | 2007 | 546 |
| 13 | Meta-analysis of Pap Test Accuracy Hit paper breakdown → | 1995 | 543 |
| 14 | 1995 | 400 | |
| 15 | 2003 | 396 | |
| 16 | 2008 | 344 | |
| 17 | How to use the evidence: assessment and application of scientific evidence | 2000 | 342 |
| 18 | 2006 | 334 | |
| 19 | 2009 | 328 | |
| 20 | 2010 | 308 |
About Les Irwig
Les Irwig is a scholar working on Oncology, Epidemiology, Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty, Economics and Econometrics and General Health Professions, having authored 285 papers that have together received 27.8k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Global Cancer Incidence and Screening (41 papers), Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection (33 papers), Meta-analysis and systematic reviews (28 papers), Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (21 papers), Cervical Cancer and HPV Research (20 papers), Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials (17 papers), Breast Cancer Treatment Studies (13 papers) and Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies (11 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty (1.4k citations), Oncology (4.4k citations), Cancer Research (1.9k citations), Family Practice (211 citations) and Health Informatics (169 citations). Les Irwig has collaborated with scholars based in Australia, United States and United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include Petra Macaskill, Paul Glasziou, Jonathan J Deeks, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Henrica C. W. de Vet, Constantine Gatsonis, Johannes B. Reitsma, David E. Bruns, Nehmat Houssami and Lotty Hooft. Their work appears in journals such as The Medical Journal of Australia, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, BMJ Open, The Lancet and The Breast.
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.