Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
Impact in
- Geriatrics and Gerontology top 1%
- Family Practice top 1%
Papers in
-
- Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life 219
- Pediatric Pain Management Techniques 130
-
- Heart Failure Treatment and Management 122
- Top scholars
- Peter C. AustinJack V. TuMuhammad MamdaniDonald A. RedelmeierDouglas S. LeeDavid N. JuurlinkThérèse A. StukelCarl van Walraven
- Journals
- PLoS ONE (257 papers)BMJ Open (183 papers)JAMA Network Open (153 papers)Canadian Medical Association Journal (145 papers)Canadian Journal of Cardiology (129 papers)
- Partner nations
- CanadaUnited StatesUnited Kingdom
In The Last Decade
Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
6.4k papers receiving 252.8k citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 243
- Geriatrics and Gerontology 5.6k
- Family Practice 2.8k
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine 33.2k
- Emergency Medicine 12.4k
- Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 2.3k
Countries citing scholars working at Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences. 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 Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences more than expected).
Fields of papers published by authors at Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences 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 Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences at the time of their publication.
About Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
In recent decades, authors affiliated with Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences have published 8.9k papers, which have received a total of 376.2k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 556 papers in Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health, 645 papers in Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, 257 papers in Emergency Medicine, 97 papers in Geriatrics and Gerontology and 678 papers in General Health Professions on the topics of Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (328 papers), Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life (219 papers), Healthcare Policy and Management (173 papers), Primary Care and Health Outcomes (159 papers), Pediatric Pain Management Techniques (130 papers), Heart Failure Treatment and Management (122 papers), Emergency and Acute Care Studies (116 papers) and Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues (115 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Geriatrics and Gerontology (5.6k citations), Family Practice (2.8k citations), Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine (33.2k citations), Emergency Medicine (12.4k citations) and Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology (2.3k citations). Authors at Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences collaborate with scholars in Canada, United States and United Kingdom and have published in prestigious journals including PLoS ONE, BMJ Open, JAMA Network Open, Canadian Medical Association Journal and Canadian Journal of Cardiology. Some of Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences's most productive authors include Peter C. Austin, Jack V. Tu, Muhammad Mamdani, Donald A. Redelmeier, Douglas S. Lee, David N. Juurlink, Thérèse A. Stukel, Carl van Walraven, David Henry and C. David Naylor.
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.