Congressional Budget Office
Impact in
- Economics and Econometrics top 10%
- Healthcare Policy and Management
- Fiscal Policies and Political Economy
- Climate Change Policy and Economics
- Economic and Fiscal Studies
- Health top 10%
- Health disparities and outcomes
Papers in
-
- Healthcare Policy and Management 80
- Economic and Fiscal Studies 45
- Fiscal Policies and Political Economy 33
- Labor market dynamics and wage inequality 12
-
- Monetary Policy and Economic Impact 27
- Top scholars
- Jeffrey R. KlingTerry DinanStephen M. MillerJens LudwigGreg J. DuncanScott R. MillimanRonald C. KesslerLisa A. Gennetian
- Journals
- Health Affairs (25 papers)Contemporary Economic Policy (13 papers)American Economic Review (9 papers)Journal of Environmental Economics and Management (7 papers)Political Science Quarterly (7 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesAustraliaUnited Kingdom
In The Last Decade
Congressional Budget Office
362 papers receiving 10.1k citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 174
- Economics and Econometrics 3.5k
- Health 724
- General Economics, Econometrics and Finance 757
- General Decision Sciences 172
- Finance 632
Countries citing scholars working at Congressional Budget Office
This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at Congressional Budget Office. 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 Congressional Budget Office with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Congressional Budget Office more than expected).
Fields of papers published by authors at Congressional Budget Office
This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Congressional Budget Office 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 Congressional Budget Office at the time of their publication.
About Congressional Budget Office
In recent decades, authors affiliated with Congressional Budget Office have published 380 papers, which have received a total of 10.1k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 212 papers in Economics and Econometrics, 38 papers in General Economics, Econometrics and Finance, 37 papers in Accounting, 21 papers in Finance and 2 papers in General Energy on the topics of Healthcare Policy and Management (80 papers), Economic and Fiscal Studies (45 papers), Fiscal Policies and Political Economy (33 papers), Monetary Policy and Economic Impact (27 papers), Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis (23 papers), Opioid Use Disorder Treatment (16 papers), Labor market dynamics and wage inequality (12 papers) and Retirement, Disability, and Employment (12 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Economics and Econometrics (3.5k citations), Health (724 citations), General Economics, Econometrics and Finance (757 citations), General Decision Sciences (172 citations) and Finance (632 citations). Authors at Congressional Budget Office collaborate with scholars in United States, Australia and United Kingdom and have published in prestigious journals including Health Affairs, Contemporary Economic Policy, American Economic Review, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management and Political Science Quarterly. Some of Congressional Budget Office's most productive authors include Jeffrey R. Kling, Terry Dinan, Stephen M. Miller, Jens Ludwig, Greg J. Duncan, Scott R. Milliman, Ronald C. Kessler, Lisa A. Gennetian, Lisa Sanbonmatsu and Lawrence F. Katz.
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.