National Board of Medical Examiners
Impact in
- Family Practice top 1%
- Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
-
- Innovations in Medical Education
- Medical Education and Admissions
Papers in
- Family Practice 124
- Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills 123
-
- Psychometric Methodologies and Testing 130
- Top scholars
- David B. SwansonMichael T. KaneBrian E. ClauserD. Betsy McCoachDavid A. KennyHoward WainerAndré F. De ChamplainSusan M. Case
- Journals
- Academic Medicine (145 papers)Journal of Educational Measurement (40 papers)Educational Measurement Issues and Practice (28 papers)Medical Teacher (28 papers)Applied Psychological Measurement (26 papers)
- Partner nations
- United StatesCanadaUnited Kingdom
In The Last Decade
National Board of Medical Examiners
635 papers receiving 15.1k citations
Peers
Comparison fields: 5 of 217
- Family Practice 2.4k
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health 6.0k
- Management Science and Operations Research 2.7k
- Health Informatics 199
- Statistics and Probability 944
Countries citing scholars working at National Board of Medical Examiners
This map shows the geographic impact of research produced by authors working at National Board of Medical Examiners. 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 National Board of Medical Examiners with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites National Board of Medical Examiners more than expected).
Fields of papers published by authors at National Board of Medical Examiners
This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with National Board of Medical Examiners 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 National Board of Medical Examiners at the time of their publication.
About National Board of Medical Examiners
In recent decades, authors affiliated with National Board of Medical Examiners have published 853 papers, which have received a total of 21.6k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 124 papers in Family Practice, 148 papers in Management Science and Operations Research, 283 papers in Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, 73 papers in Statistics and Probability and 52 papers in Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty on the topics of Innovations in Medical Education (249 papers), Psychometric Methodologies and Testing (130 papers), Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills (123 papers), Medical Education and Admissions (69 papers), Radiology practices and education (64 papers), Advanced Statistical Modeling Techniques (46 papers), Reliability and Agreement in Measurement (41 papers) and Advanced Statistical Methods and Models (35 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Family Practice (2.4k citations), Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health (6.0k citations), Management Science and Operations Research (2.7k citations), Health Informatics (199 citations) and Statistics and Probability (944 citations). Authors at National Board of Medical Examiners collaborate with scholars in United States, Canada and United Kingdom and have published in prestigious journals including Academic Medicine, Journal of Educational Measurement, Educational Measurement Issues and Practice, Medical Teacher and Applied Psychological Measurement. Some of National Board of Medical Examiners's most productive authors include David B. Swanson, Michael T. Kane, Brian E. Clauser, D. Betsy McCoach, David A. Kenny, Howard Wainer, André F. De Champlain, Susan M. Case, Cees van der Vleuten and Robert M. Galbraith.
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.