Paula Williamson
Impact in
- Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty top 0.02%
- Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Toxicology top 0.2%
Papers in
-
- Delphi Technique in Research 136
-
- Meta-analysis and systematic reviews 54
- Co-authors
- Mike Clarke (66 shared papers)Susanna Dodd (41 shared papers)Jamie J Kirkham (49 shared papers)Carrol Gamble (55 shared papers)Gillian Lancaster (6 shared papers)Elizabeth Gargon (33 shared papers)Jane Blazeby (41 shared papers)Catrin Tudur Smith (46 shared papers)
- Journals
- Trials (101 papers)Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (33 papers)PLoS ONE (30 papers)BMJ Open (27 papers)Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (14 papers)
- Partner nations
- United KingdomUnited StatesAustralia
In The Last Decade
Paula Williamson
493 papers receiving 28.5k citations
Paula Williamson's Hit Papers
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 217
- Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty 2.4k
- Toxicology 487
- Geriatrics and Gerontology 407
- Pharmacology 889
- Psychiatry and Mental health 1.4k
Countries citing papers authored by Paula Williamson
This map shows the geographic impact of Paula Williamson'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 Paula Williamson with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Paula Williamson more than expected).
Fields of papers citing papers by Paula Williamson
This network shows the impact of papers produced by Paula Williamson. 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 Paula Williamson. The network helps show where Paula Williamson may publish in the future.
Co-authors
The 25 scholars most cited alongside Paula Williamson, 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 505 papers — load more, or switch the sort, to bring in the rest.
| # | Work | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Design and analysis of pilot studies: recommendations for good practice Hit paper breakdown → | 2004 | 1673 |
| 2 | The COMET Handbook: version 1.0 Hit paper breakdown → | 2017 | 1173 |
| 3 | Developing core outcome sets for clinical trials: issues to consider Hit paper breakdown → | 2012 | 1109 |
| 4 | Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias Hit paper breakdown → | 2008 | 1108 |
| 5 | The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews Hit paper breakdown → | 2010 | 791 |
| 6 | Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias — An Updated Review Hit paper breakdown → | 2013 | 746 |
| 7 | How to select outcome measurement instruments for outcomes included in a “Core Outcome Set” – a practical guideline Hit paper breakdown → | 2016 | 685 |
| 8 | Using the Delphi Technique to Determine Which Outcomes to Measure in Clinical Trials: Recommendations for the Future Based on a Systematic Review of Existing Studies Hit paper breakdown → | 2011 | 610 |
| 9 | A Randomized Trial of Genotype-Guided Dosing of Warfarin Hit paper breakdown → | 2013 | 597 |
| 10 | Mechanisms of phosphatidylserine exposure, a phagocyte recognition signal, on apoptotic T lymphocytes. Hit paper breakdown → | 1995 | 570 |
| 11 | Adverse Drug Reactions in Hospital In-Patients: A Prospective Analysis of 3695 Patient-Episodes Hit paper breakdown → | 2009 | 529 |
| 12 | 2002 | 450 | |
| 13 | Core Outcome Set-STAndards for Development: The COS-STAD recommendations Hit paper breakdown → | 2017 | 444 |
| 14 | Core Outcome Set–STAndards for Reporting: The COS-STAR Statement Hit paper breakdown → | 2016 | 401 |
| 15 | A taxonomy has been developed for outcomes in medical research to help improve knowledge discovery Hit paper breakdown → | 2017 | 385 |
| 16 | 2007 | 311 | |
| 17 | 2001 | 302 | |
| 18 | 2004 | 283 | |
| 19 | Guidelines for the Content of Statistical Analysis Plans in Clinical Trials Hit paper breakdown → | 2017 | 273 |
| 20 | 2017 | 266 |
About Paula Williamson
Paula Williamson is a scholar working on Sociology and Political Science, Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Economics and Econometrics and Statistics and Probability, having authored 505 papers that have together received 29.1k indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Delphi Technique in Research (136 papers), Meta-analysis and systematic reviews (54 papers), Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (45 papers), Ethics in Clinical Research (24 papers), Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials (20 papers), Epilepsy research and treatment (18 papers), Mental Health and Patient Involvement (14 papers) and Clinical practice guidelines implementation (13 papers). The work is most often cited by research in Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty (2.4k citations), Toxicology (487 citations), Geriatrics and Gerontology (407 citations), Pharmacology (889 citations) and Psychiatry and Mental health (1.4k citations). Paula Williamson has collaborated with scholars based in United Kingdom, United States and Australia. Frequent co-authors include Mike Clarke, Susanna Dodd, Jamie J Kirkham, Carrol Gamble, Gillian Lancaster, Elizabeth Gargon, Jane Blazeby, Catrin Tudur Smith, Douglas G. Altman and Robert Schlegel. Their work appears in journals such as Trials, Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, PLoS ONE, BMJ Open and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
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.