Countries where authors publish in Social Theory & Health
Since Specialization
Citations
This map shows the geographic impact of research published in Social Theory & Health. 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 Social Theory & Health with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Social Theory & Health more than expected).
Fields of papers published in Social Theory & Health
This network shows the impact of papers published in Social Theory & Health. 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 Social Theory & Health.
About Social Theory & Health
The 484 papers published in Social Theory & Health in the last decades have received a total of 9k indexed citations . Papers published in Social Theory & Health usually cover Pharmacy (27 papers), General Health Professions (152 papers), Health (55 papers), Sociology and Political Science (145 papers) and Clinical Psychology (56 papers) specifically the topics of Health, Medicine and Society (37 papers), Public Health and Social Inequalities (35 papers), Foucault, Power, and Ethics (35 papers), Medicine, History, and Philosophy (26 papers), Obesity and Health Practices (25 papers), Health Services Management and Policy (25 papers), Health disparities and outcomes (24 papers) and HIV/AIDS Research and Interventions (21 papers). The most active scholars publishing in Social Theory & Health are Deborah A. Lupton, Graham Scambler, Lee F. Monaghan, Iliya Gutin, Nikolas Rose, Lucy Aphramor, Emma Rich, Vinh-Kim Nguyen, John Evans and Simon Johnson Williams.
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.