The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions
Impact in
- Ecology 242
Classified as
- Journal
- Statistics in Medicine
In The Last Decade
doi.org/10.1002/sim.3680 →Countries where authors are citing The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions
This map shows the geographic impact of The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions. 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 The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions more than expected).
Fields of papers citing The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions
This network shows the impact of The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions.
About The BUGS project: Evolution, critique and future directions
This paper, published in 2009, received 1.5k indexed citations . Written by David J. Lunn, David J. Spiegelhalter, Andrew C. Thomas and Nicky Best covering the research area of Statistics and Probability and Artificial Intelligence. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Statistics and Probability (321 citations), Ecology (242 citations), Nature and Landscape Conservation (178 citations), Artificial Intelligence (153 citations) and Global and Planetary Change (148 citations). Published in Statistics in Medicine.
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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/10.1002/sim.3680.