Michael John Denham

791 citations
59 papers · 586 · h-index 14

Impact in

Papers in

Michael John Denham

48 papers receiving 501 citations

Peers

Michael John Denham
Comparison fields: 5 of 92
  • Geriatrics and Gerontology 136
  • Pharmacology 75
  • Pharmacy 29
  • Family Practice 16
  • Internal Medicine 16
Replace Amanda S. Mixon with:
Amanda S. Mixon United States
Miren I Jones United Kingdom
Frank Verheyen Germany
Sander Diederik Borgsteede Netherlands
Robin Briant New Zealand
Sven Streit Switzerland
Junya Zhu United States
Tracey H. Taveira United States
Courtney C. Kennedy Canada
Patricia P. Barry United States
Michael John Denham relative to Amanda S. Mixon United States Amanda S. Mixon's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2×3.2×
Amanda S. Mixon · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by Michael John Denham

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by Michael John Denham

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Michael John Denham. 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 Michael John Denham. The network helps show where Michael John Denham may publish in the future.

Co-authors

The 24 scholars most cited alongside Michael John Denham, 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 Michael John Denham Line = papers co-authored together Michael John Denham links everyone, so they are left out of the graph.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown

Showing the 20 most-cited of 59 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.

#Work
1 200571
2 200359
3 199033
4 198029
5 200629
6 197726
7 197925
8 198725
9 197723
10 197320
11 199819
12 198818
13 198817
14 198614
15
Health visiting and the elderly
198613
16 198713
17 197512
18 197711
19 201111
20 198010

About Michael John Denham

Michael John Denham is a scholar working on Geriatrics and Gerontology, General Health Professions, History and Philosophy of Science, Internal Medicine and Pharmacy, having authored 59 papers that have together received 586 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Pharmaceutical Practices and Patient Outcomes (12 papers), Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes (8 papers), History of Science and Medicine (6 papers), Health Services Management and Policy (4 papers), Aging, Elder Care, and Social Issues (4 papers), Clinical Laboratory Practices and Quality Control (3 papers), Nursing care and research (3 papers) and Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management (3 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Geriatrics and Gerontology (136 citations), Pharmacology (75 citations), Pharmacy (29 citations), Family Practice (16 citations) and Internal Medicine (16 citations). Michael John Denham has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom. Frequent co-authors include Sally‐Anne Francis, Nina Lee Barnett, Nicola Jane Gray, Felicity J. Smith, H. M. HODKINSON, Jonathan Graffy, Sylvia M. Dobbs, R. John Dobbs, David A. J. Tyrrell and J. Patrick Royston. Their work appears in journals such as Age and Ageing, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, Health & Social Care in the Community, The Lancet and Drugs & Aging.

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