Royal College of Physicians

142.9k citations
3.6k papers ·

Impact in

Papers in

Royal College of Physicians

3.3k papers receiving 139.2k citations

Peers

Royal College of Physicians
Comparison fields: 5 of 239
  • Clinical Psychology 14.4k
  • Family Practice 1.5k
  • Psychiatry and Mental health 10.1k
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine 10.4k
  • Neurology 8.1k
Replace Brighton and Sussex Medical School with:
Brighton and Sussex Medical School United Kingdom
Leicester General Hospital United Kingdom
St Mary's Hospital United Kingdom
Northern General Hospital United Kingdom
Hull York Medical School United Kingdom
Northwick Park Hospital United Kingdom
Chelsea and Westminster Hospital United Kingdom
St. Mary's Hospital United Kingdom
Salford Royal Hospital United Kingdom
Leicester Royal Infirmary United Kingdom
Royal College of Physicians relative to Brighton and Sussex Medical School United Kingdom Brighton and Sussex Medical School's profile →
Citations per field
00.5×1.7×
Brighton and Sussex Medical School · 1×
Citations per year

Countries citing scholars working at Royal College of Physicians

Since Specialization
Citations

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

Fields of papers published by authors at Royal College of Physicians

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers affiliated with Royal College of Physicians 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 Royal College of Physicians at the time of their publication.

About Royal College of Physicians

In recent decades, authors affiliated with Royal College of Physicians have published 3.6k papers, which have received a total of 142.9k indexed citations . Scholars at this organization have produced 42 papers in Family Practice, 465 papers in General Health Professions, 77 papers in Health Information Management, 162 papers in Emergency Medicine and 20 papers in General Psychology on the topics of Innovations in Medical Education (130 papers), Primary Care and Health Outcomes (128 papers), Clinical practice guidelines implementation (83 papers), Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes (80 papers), Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications (78 papers), Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life (75 papers), Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development (70 papers) and Healthcare Policy and Management (67 papers). Their work is cited by papers focused on Clinical Psychology (14.4k citations), Family Practice (1.5k citations), Psychiatry and Mental health (10.1k citations), Pathology and Forensic Medicine (10.4k citations) and Neurology (8.1k citations). Authors at Royal College of Physicians collaborate with scholars in United Kingdom, United States and Canada and have published in prestigious journals including Clinical Medicine, New England Journal of Medicine, BMJ, Surgical Clinics of North America and Medical Clinics of North America. Some of Royal College of Physicians's most productive authors include Jonathan E. Shaw, Paul Zimmet, K. G. M. M. Alberti, Alfred I. Neugut, Zacharias Dische, Katherine D. Crew, Karl H. Perzin, Patricia Cohen, Mark Olfson and Jonathan Posner.

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