Mark William Yates

550 citations
34 papers · 404 · h-index 10

Impact in

Papers in

Mark William Yates

31 papers receiving 397 citations

Peers

Mark William Yates
Comparison fields: 5 of 59
  • Psychiatry and Mental health 184
  • Geriatrics and Gerontology 21
  • Internal Medicine 18
  • General Health Professions 88
  • Occupational Therapy 20
Replace Lulu Liao with:
Lulu Liao China
Owen Davies Australia
Den‐Ching A. Lee Australia
Ingrid Hendlmeier Germany
Lindsey Brett Australia
Jocelyn Charles Canada
Maria OʼReilly Australia
Doris L. Milke Canada
Margaret Winbolt Australia
Elizabeth Bass United States
Mark William Yates relative to Lulu Liao China Lulu Liao's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×5×10×12.5×
Lulu Liao · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Mark William Yates

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Mark William Yates

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Mark William Yates. 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 Mark William Yates. The network helps show where Mark William Yates may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 25 scholars most cited alongside Mark William Yates, 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 Mark William Yates Line = papers co-authored together Mark William Yates links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 34 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 2016103
2 201982
3 201629
4 202024
5 200122
6 202119
7 201917
8 201115
9 202214
10 201812
11 201710
12 20208
13 20258
14 20245
15 20144
16 20214
17 20234
18 20053
19 20183
20 20243

About Mark William Yates

Mark William Yates is a scholar working on Psychiatry and Mental health, General Health Professions, Internal Medicine, Demography and Physiology, having authored 34 papers that have together received 404 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research (22 papers), Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes (4 papers), Nursing Roles and Practices (3 papers), Technology Use by Older Adults (2 papers), Health Policy Implementation Science (2 papers), Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (2 papers), Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management (2 papers) and Health Sciences Research and Education (2 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Psychiatry and Mental health (184 citations), Geriatrics and Gerontology (21 citations), Internal Medicine (18 citations), General Health Professions (88 citations) and Occupational Therapy (20 citations). Mark William Yates has collaborated with scholars based in Australia. Frequent co-authors include Christopher Mesagno, Suzanne McLaren, Kyle J. Miller, Rapson Gomez, Fergal Grace, Henry Brodaty, Dimity C Pond, Anna Wong Shee, Dianne Goeman and Alison Margaret Hutchinson. Their work appears in journals such as BMC Family Practice, The Medical Journal of Australia, BMC Geriatrics, Australasian Journal on Ageing and International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.

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