Baum Consult

20.5k citations
575 papers ·

Impact in

Papers in

Baum Consult

488 papers receiving 17.6k citations

Peers

Baum Consult
Comparison fields: 5 of 233
  • Biological Psychiatry 598
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine 4.1k
  • Psychiatry and Mental health 2.0k
  • Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging 2.4k
  • Behavioral Neuroscience 347
Replace Augenstern with:
Augenstern Germany
Azienda Sanitaria di Firenze Italy
Otto Wagner Hospital Austria
Hersenstichting Netherlands
University and Rehabilitation Clinics Ulm Germany
Ferioli & Gianotti (Italy) Italy
Kommunedata (Denmark) Denmark
Schön Klinik Hamburg Eilbek Germany
Istituto Nazionale per le Ricerche Cardiovascolari Italy
Netherlands Consortium for Healthy Ageing Netherlands
Baum Consult relative to Augenstern Germany Augenstern's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×3.1×
Augenstern · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at Baum Consult

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at Baum Consult. 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 papers produced at Baum Consult with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Baum Consult more than expected).

Fields of papers published by authors at Baum Consult

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Baum Consult at the time of their publication. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers affiliated with Baum Consult at the time of their publication.

About Baum Consult

In recent decades, authors affiliated with Baum Consult have published 575 papers, which have received a total of 20.5k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 13 papers in Biological Psychiatry, 60 papers in Psychiatry and Mental health, 37 papers in Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, 53 papers in Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine and 43 papers in Strategy and Management on the topics of Schizophrenia research and treatment (39 papers), Corporate Governance and Management (34 papers), Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics (23 papers), Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments (19 papers), Corporate Management and Leadership (19 papers), Bipolar Disorder and Treatment (18 papers), Cardiovascular Function and Risk Factors (15 papers) and Functional Brain Connectivity Studies (14 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Biological Psychiatry (598 citations), Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine (4.1k citations), Psychiatry and Mental health (2.0k citations), Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging (2.4k citations) and Behavioral Neuroscience (347 citations). Authors at Baum Consult collaborate with scholars in Germany, United States and United Kingdom and have published in prestigious journals including Circulation, European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Journal of School Health and Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. Some of Baum Consult's most productive authors include Harvey Feigenbaum, Arthur E. Weyman, James C. Dillon, Jo Anne Grunbaum, Laura Kann, Christoph Mulert, L. Samüel Wann, James G. Ross, Samuel Meerbaum and Steven A. Kinchen.

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 institutions with similar magnitude of impact