Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy.
Impact in
- Epidemiology 104
Classified as
- Journal
- PubMed
In The Last Decade
doi.org/w36508792 →Countries where authors are citing Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy.
This map shows the geographic impact of Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy.. 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 Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy. more than expected).
Fields of papers citing Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy.
This network shows the impact of Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy.. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy..
About Brief questions to identify patients with inadequate health literacy.
This paper, published in 2004, received 1.6k indexed citations . Written by Lisa D. Chew, Katharine A. Bradley and Edward J. Boyko covering the research area of General Health Professions. It is primarily cited by scholars working on General Health Professions (726 citations), Epidemiology (104 citations), Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (85 citations), Health (84 citations) and Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism (80 citations). Published in 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.
This paper is also available at doi.org/w36508792.