Holistic Nursing Practice

1.6k papers and 19.0k indexed citations i.

About

The 1.6k papers published in Holistic Nursing Practice in the last decades have received a total of 19.0k indexed citations. Papers published in Holistic Nursing Practice usually cover General Health Professions (350 papers), Clinical Psychology (312 papers) and Complementary and alternative medicine (218 papers) specifically the topics of Complementary and Alternative Medicine Studies (180 papers), Religion, Spirituality, and Psychology (130 papers) and Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues (88 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Holistic Nursing Practice are Christina Jackson, Stephanie Maxine Ross, Margaret A. Burkhardt, Ruth McCaffrey, Kathleen R. Tusaie, Janyce G. Dyer, Anne Vitale, Mary Bishop, Shauna L. Shapiro and Joanne Cohen-Katz.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers published in Holistic Nursing Practice

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers published in Holistic Nursing Practice. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers published in Holistic Nursing Practice.

Countries where authors publish in Holistic Nursing Practice

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Holistic Nursing Practice. 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 published in Holistic Nursing Practice with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Holistic Nursing Practice more than expected).

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 journals with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025