Florence Nightingale Foundation

32.4k citations
1.1k papers ·

Impact in

Papers in

Florence Nightingale Foundation

764 papers receiving 19.7k citations

Peers

Florence Nightingale Foundation
Comparison fields: 5 of 217
  • Research and Theory 1.1k
  • General Health Professions 6.4k
  • Issues, ethics and legal aspects 301
  • Leadership and Management 212
  • Emergency Medical Services 1.1k
Replace Royal College of Nursing with:
Royal College of Nursing United Kingdom
Centre for Nursing Innovation United Kingdom
Department of Health and Social Care United Kingdom
Institute of Medical Ethics United Kingdom
King's Fund United Kingdom
Health Education England United Kingdom
South West London and St George's Mental Health NHS Trust United Kingdom
Health Service Executive Ireland
NHS Tayside United Kingdom
Department of Health Ireland
Florence Nightingale Foundation relative to Royal College of Nursing United Kingdom Royal College of Nursing's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×2.7×
Royal College of Nursing · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at Florence Nightingale Foundation

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers published by authors at Florence Nightingale Foundation

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Florence Nightingale Foundation 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 Florence Nightingale Foundation at the time of their publication.

About Florence Nightingale Foundation

In recent decades, authors affiliated with Florence Nightingale Foundation have published 1.1k papers, which have received a total of 32.4k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 30 papers in Research and Theory, 17 papers in Issues, ethics and legal aspects, 199 papers in General Health Professions, 10 papers in Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology and 41 papers in Emergency Medical Services on the topics of Geriatric Care and Nursing Homes (40 papers), Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues (40 papers), Inflammatory Bowel Disease (31 papers), Nursing education and management (30 papers), Diabetes Management and Education (29 papers), Mental Health and Patient Involvement (28 papers), Global Health Workforce Issues (27 papers) and Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units (26 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Research and Theory (1.1k citations), General Health Professions (6.4k citations), Issues, ethics and legal aspects (301 citations), Leadership and Management (212 citations) and Emergency Medical Services (1.1k citations). Authors at Florence Nightingale Foundation collaborate with scholars in United Kingdom, United States and Australia and have published in prestigious journals including Journal of Advanced Nursing, International Journal of Nursing Studies, Journal of Clinical Nursing, Midwifery and BMJ Open. Some of Florence Nightingale Foundation's most productive authors include Alison While, Ian Norman, Peter Griffiths, Niall McCrae, Emma Ream, Annmarie Grealish, Christine Norton, Anne Marie Rafferty, K. Louise Barriball and Trevor Murrells.

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