A clinician rating scale for assessing current and lifetime PTSD. The CAPS-1
Impact in
- Epidemiology 143
- Journal
- Behavior Therapy
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w3423181 →Countries where authors are citing A clinician rating scale for assessing current and lifetime PTSD. The CAPS-1
This map shows the geographic impact of A clinician rating scale for assessing current and lifetime PTSD. The CAPS-1. 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 A clinician rating scale for assessing current and lifetime PTSD. The CAPS-1 with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites A clinician rating scale for assessing current and lifetime PTSD. The CAPS-1 more than expected).
Fields of papers citing A clinician rating scale for assessing current and lifetime PTSD. The CAPS-1
This network shows the impact of A clinician rating scale for assessing current and lifetime PTSD. The CAPS-1. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the A clinician rating scale for assessing current and lifetime PTSD. The CAPS-1.
About A clinician rating scale for assessing current and lifetime PTSD. The CAPS-1
This paper, published in 1990, received 969 indexed citations . Written by Dudley David Blake, Frank W. Weathers, Danny G. Kaloupek, Dennis S. Charney and Terence M. Keane. It is primarily cited by scholars working on Clinical Psychology (770 citations), Epidemiology (143 citations), Experimental and Cognitive Psychology (86 citations), General Health Professions (75 citations) and Psychiatry and Mental health (72 citations). Published in Behavior Therapy.
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/w3423181.