L.J. Rogak

Pilot corpus only

This score is computed over theSindex pilot corpus and does not cover the full scientific literature. Scores are relative to papers we have ingested — papers, authors, and institutions outside the pilot are not represented. Methodology.

Top 100%percentile

0Author DataRank

Indexed papers

0in pilot corpus

datarank_citation_only_1hop_v6· scope data_onlyMethodology

Papers

Driven by 3 papers. Top paper: “Composite grading algorithm for the National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE)”.

Composite grading algorithm for the National Cancer Institute’s Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE)

UNC Libraries(2022)10.17615/fx77-nh44

N/A

0DataRank · unranked

2 citations

M.M. Gounder, G.K. Schwartz, E. Basch, J.A. Sloan, B.B. Reeve +15 more

An Exploratory Analysis of the “Was It Worth It?” Questionnaire as a Novel Metric to Capture Patient Perceptions of Cancer Treatment

UNC Libraries(2022)10.17615/bc3a-dr80

N/A

0DataRank · unranked

0 citations

G. Thanarajasingam, G. Schwab, G.L. Mazza, A.V. Bennett, L.J. Rogak +4 more

What Do “None,” “Mild,” “Moderate,” “Severe,” and “Very Severe” Mean to Patients With Cancer? Content Validity of PRO-CTCAE™ Response Scales

UNC Libraries(2022)10.17615/d0jm-g543

N/A

0DataRank · unranked

0 citations

A.C. Dueck, S.A. Mitchell, L.M. Minasian, L.J. Rogak, J.L. Hay +3 more