Family Practice

75.5k papers and 1.7M indexed citations i.

About

75.5k papers covering Family Practice have received a total of 1.7M indexed citations since 1950. Papers on subfields are most often about the specific topic of Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills, Medication Adherence and Compliance and Innovations in Medical Education and also cover the fields of Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Geriatrics and Gerontology and General Health Professions. Papers citing papers on subfields are usually about Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, General Health Professions and Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine. Some of the most active scholars covering Family Practice are Robert Goodman, Penny Whiting, M. Robin DiMatteo, Cees van der Vleuten, Ronald M. Epstein, Pat Croskerry, Olle ten Cate, K. Anders Ericsson, John E. Ware and Joyce A. Cramer.

In The Last Decade

Fields of papers citing papers about Family Practice

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers covering Family 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 covering Family Practice.

Countries where authors publish papers about Family Practice

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of research in Family 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 about Family Practice with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Family 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 fields with similar magnitude of impact

Rankless by CCL
2025