William E. Curtis

956 citations
15 papers · 792 · h-index 12

Impact in

Papers in

William E. Curtis

15 papers receiving 747 citations

Peers

William E. Curtis
Comparison fields: 5 of 75
  • Surgery 335
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine 153
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine 121
  • Emergency Medicine 51
  • Epidemiology 158
Replace Bernard Hausen with:
Bernard Hausen Germany
Thomas N. Masters United States
Robert S. Poston United States
Olav F Münter Sellevold Norway
J Mercier France
K W Diederich Germany
Alberto Forni Italy
Steven D. Tennenberg United States
Wim Stooker Netherlands
Andrew Mitchell United Kingdom
William E. Curtis relative to Bernard Hausen Germany Bernard Hausen's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×
Bernard Hausen · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing papers authored by William E. Curtis

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers citing papers by William E. Curtis

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

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

Co-authors

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

All Works

15 of 15 papers shown
#Work
1 2002145
2 1996141
3 199489
4 199370
5 198554
6
Inhibition of neutrophil adherence improves postischemic ventricular performance of the neonatal heart.
199351
7 198847
8 199344
9 199342
10 199235
11 199334
12 199325
13 196910
14 19973
15 19972

About William E. Curtis

William E. Curtis is a scholar working on Surgery, Molecular Biology, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Biomedical Engineering and Pathology and Forensic Medicine, having authored 15 papers that have together received 792 indexed citations. Recurring topics across this work include Cardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques (6 papers), Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices (3 papers), Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias (2 papers), Ion channel regulation and function (2 papers), Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research (2 papers), Sulfur Compounds in Biology (2 papers), Cardiac Ischemia and Reperfusion (2 papers) and Cardiac Fibrosis and Remodeling (1 paper). The work is most often cited by research in Surgery (335 citations), Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine (153 citations), Pathology and Forensic Medicine (121 citations), Emergency Medicine (51 citations) and Epidemiology (158 citations). William E. Curtis has collaborated with scholars based in United States. Frequent co-authors include Duke E. Cameron, William A. Baumgartner, Timothy J. Gardner, A. Marc Gillinov, A. Marc Gillinov, Ian C. Wilson, Rinoo V. Shah, R. Scott Stuart, Peter S. Greene and Ronald M. Burch. Their work appears in journals such as The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Anesthesia & Analgesia, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and PubMed.

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