World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 31 11174 10454 5843 5332 120 4341

Allison J. Applebaum publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Allison J. Applebaum between 2006 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Allison J. Applebaum published across 20 years, from 2006 to 2025, averaging 9.3 papers a year. Output peaked at 30 publications in 2024. 46 of the 185 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2006 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 30. Peak 30 publications in 2024. 2006: 2 publications 2007: 0 publications 2008: 0 publications 2009: 3 publications 2010: 3 publications 2011: 2 publications 2012: 2 publications 2013: 3 publications 2014: 7 publications 2015: 9 publications 2016: 5 publications 2017: 10 publications 2018: 11 publications 2019: 9 publications 2020: 12 publications 2021: 18 publications 2022: 23 publications 2023: 20 publications 2024: 30 publications 2025: 16 publications
2006 2025

185 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Allison J. Applebaum: publications per year, 2006 to 2025
Year Publications
2006 2
2007 0
2008 0
2009 3
2010 3
2011 2
2012 2
2013 3
2014 7
2015 9
2016 5
2017 10
2018 11
2019 9
2020 12
2021 18
2022 23
2023 20
2024 30
2025 16
Total 185
Download as CSV

Allison J. Applebaum publication distribution in Psychology in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Psychology in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Allison J. Applebaum sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 69 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 31–40 to 705+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 736. Most scientists, 736, have 101–110 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 111–120 publications, is where this scientist sits. 31–40 publications: 6 scientists 41–50 publications: 52 scientists 51–60 publications: 138 scientists 61–70 publications: 299 scientists 71–80 publications: 461 scientists 81–90 publications: 605 scientists 91–100 publications: 713 scientists 101–110 publications: 736 scientists 111–120 publications: 686 scientists 121–130 publications: 670 scientists 131–140 publications: 644 scientists 141–150 publications: 597 scientists 151–160 publications: 576 scientists 161–170 publications: 477 scientists 171–180 publications: 450 scientists 181–190 publications: 397 scientists 191–200 publications: 343 scientists 201–210 publications: 328 scientists 211–220 publications: 313 scientists 221–230 publications: 283 scientists 231–240 publications: 226 scientists 241–250 publications: 196 scientists 251–260 publications: 201 scientists 261–270 publications: 171 scientists 271–280 publications: 151 scientists 281–290 publications: 139 scientists 291–300 publications: 113 scientists 301–310 publications: 102 scientists 311–320 publications: 100 scientists 321–330 publications: 76 scientists 331–340 publications: 92 scientists 341–350 publications: 85 scientists 351–360 publications: 69 scientists 361–370 publications: 71 scientists 371–380 publications: 63 scientists 381–390 publications: 58 scientists 391–400 publications: 57 scientists 401–410 publications: 43 scientists 411–420 publications: 33 scientists 421–430 publications: 50 scientists 431–440 publications: 41 scientists 441–450 publications: 32 scientists 451–460 publications: 27 scientists 461–470 publications: 28 scientists 471–480 publications: 25 scientists 481–490 publications: 28 scientists 491–500 publications: 20 scientists 501–510 publications: 23 scientists 511–520 publications: 26 scientists 521–530 publications: 17 scientists 531–540 publications: 21 scientists 541–550 publications: 14 scientists 551–560 publications: 16 scientists 561–570 publications: 10 scientists 571–580 publications: 22 scientists 581–590 publications: 9 scientists 591–600 publications: 14 scientists 601–610 publications: 9 scientists 611–620 publications: 11 scientists 621–630 publications: 4 scientists 631–640 publications: 7 scientists 641–650 publications: 5 scientists 651–660 publications: 10 scientists 661–670 publications: 8 scientists 671–680 publications: 8 scientists 681–690 publications: 4 scientists 691–700 publications: 3 scientists 701–704 publications: 4 scientists 705+ publications: 100 scientists
31–40 publications 705+

This scientist: 120 publications — 32nd percentile

32% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
31–40 6
41–50 52
51–60 138
61–70 299
71–80 461
81–90 605
91–100 713
101–110 736
111–120 686 120
121–130 670
131–140 644
141–150 597
151–160 576
161–170 477
171–180 450
181–190 397
191–200 343
201–210 328
211–220 313
221–230 283
231–240 226
241–250 196
251–260 201
261–270 171
271–280 151
281–290 139
291–300 113
301–310 102
311–320 100
321–330 76
331–340 92
341–350 85
351–360 69
361–370 71
371–380 63
381–390 58
391–400 57
401–410 43
411–420 33
421–430 50
431–440 41
441–450 32
451–460 27
461–470 28
471–480 25
481–490 28
491–500 20
501–510 23
511–520 26
521–530 17
531–540 21
541–550 14
551–560 16
561–570 10
571–580 22
581–590 9
591–600 14
601–610 9
611–620 11
621–630 4
631–640 7
641–650 5
651–660 10
661–670 8
671–680 8
681–690 4
691–700 3
701–704 4
705+ 100
Download as CSV

Allison J. Applebaum D-index placement in Psychology in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Psychology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Allison J. Applebaum sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 58 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 144+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 702. Most scientists, 702, have 32–33 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 30–31 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 30–31 D-Index: 398 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 702 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 671 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 659 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 641 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 671 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 617 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 558 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 495 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 487 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 445 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 390 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 408 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 345 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 325 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 321 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 248 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 290 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 218 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 219 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 215 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 183 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 169 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 132 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 137 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 120 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 112 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 86 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 101 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 83 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 77 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 70 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 78 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 58 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 53 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 57 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 48 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 53 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 46 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 24 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 35 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 27 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 31 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 22 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 16 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 24 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 18 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 11 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 19 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 10 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 16 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 10 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 12 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 8 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 5 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 12 scientists 144+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30–31 D-Index 144+

This scientist: 31 D-Index — 3rd percentile

3% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 398 31
32–33 702
34–35 671
36–37 659
38–39 641
40–41 671
42–43 617
44–45 558
46–47 495
48–49 487
50–51 445
52–53 390
54–55 408
56–57 345
58–59 325
60–61 321
62–63 248
64–65 290
66–67 218
68–69 219
70–71 215
72–73 183
74–75 169
76–77 132
78–79 137
80–81 120
82–83 112
84–85 86
86–87 101
88–89 83
90–91 77
92–93 70
94–95 78
96–97 58
98–99 53
100–101 57
102–103 48
104–105 53
106–107 46
108–109 24
110–111 35
112–113 27
114–115 32
116–117 31
118–119 22
120–121 16
122–123 24
124–125 18
126–127 11
128–129 19
130–131 10
132–133 16
134–135 10
136–137 12
138–139 8
140–141 5
142–143 12
144+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

Allison J. Applebaum is affiliated with the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in the United States. Their research primarily spans the field of medicine with a focus on public health, environmental and occupational health, sociology and political science, oncology, general health professions, and clinical psychology.

The scientist's work addresses key areas related to palliative care and end-of-life issues, family support in illness, cancer survivorship and care, childhood cancer survivors' quality of life, patient-provider communication in healthcare, family and patient care in intensive care units, and family caregiving in mental illness.

Selected recent papers authored or co-authored by Allison J. Applebaum include:

  • Documentation of Caregivers as a Standard of Care (2021), Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • Meaning-Centered Psychotherapy for Cancer Caregivers: A pilot trial among caregivers of patients with glioblastoma multiforme (2022), Translational Behavioral Medicine

They have also contributed to research alongside frequent co-authors such as William Breitbart, Barry Rosenfeld, Rebecca Gebert, Amanda Kastrinos, and L Polácek.

Allison J. Applebaum's publications are often found in prominent academic venues including:

  • Psycho-Oncology
  • Palliative & Supportive Care
  • Translational Behavioral Medicine
  • Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • Transplantation and Cellular Therapy

The combination of topics, venues, and co-author relationships indicate a multidisciplinary approach that integrates psychological, medical, and social dimensions of caregiving and cancer treatment.

Best Publications

  • Meaning-Centered Group Psychotherapy: An Effective Intervention for Improving Psychological Well-Being in Patients With Advanced Cancer

    William Breitbart;Barry Rosenfeld;Hayley Pessin;Allison Applebaum

  • Individual meaning-centered psychotherapy for the treatment of psychological and existential distress: A randomized controlled trial in patients with advanced cancer.

    William Breitbart;Hayley Pessin;Barry Rosenfeld;Allison J. Applebaum

  • Care for the cancer caregiver: A systematic review

    Allison J. Applebaum;William Breitbart

  • Optimism, social support, and mental health outcomes in patients with advanced cancer

    Allison J. Applebaum;Emma M. Stein;Jennifer Lord-Bessen;Jennifer Lord-Bessen;Hayley Pessin

  • Understanding and Addressing the Role of Coping in Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Cancer.

    Joseph A Greer;Allison J Applebaum;Juliet C Jacobsen;Jennifer S Temel

  • Conceptualizing prognostic awareness in advanced cancer: A systematic review:

    Allison J Applebaum;Elissa A Kolva;Julia R Kulikowski;Jordana D Jacobs

  • A scoping review of caregiver burden during allogeneic HSCT: lessons learned and future directions.

    A J Applebaum;M Bevans;T Son;K Evans

  • Meaning-Centered Psychotherapy for Cancer Caregivers (MCP-C): Rationale and Overview.

    Allison J. Applebaum;Julia R. Kulikowski;William Breitbart

  • The impact of coping strategies of cancer caregivers on psychophysiological outcomes: an integrative review.

    Ricardo João Teixeira;Allison J Applebaum;Sangeeta Bhatia;Tânia Brandão

  • Existential distress among caregivers of patients with brain tumors: a review of the literature.

    Allison J. Applebaum;Maria Kryza-Lacombe;Justin Buthorn;Antonio DeRosa

  • Factors associated with attrition from a randomized controlled trial of meaning-centered group psychotherapy for patients with advanced cancer.

    Allison J. Applebaum;Wendy G. Lichtenthal;Hayley A. Pessin;Julia N. Radomski

  • Preliminary study of themes of meaning and psychosocial service use among informal cancer caregivers.

    Allison J. Applebaum;Carol J. Farran;Allison M. Marziliano;Anna R. Pasternak

  • Cognitive behavioral therapies for informal caregivers of patients with cancer and cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Mia S. O'Toole;Robert Zachariae;Megan E. Renna;Douglas S. Mennin

  • Rates and risks for late referral to hospice in patients with primary malignant brain tumors.

    Eli L. Diamond;David Russell;Maria Kryza-Lacombe;Kathryn H. Bowles

  • Exploring the cancer caregiver's journey through web-based Meaning-Centered Psychotherapy.

    A.J. Applebaum;K.L. Buda;E. Schofield;M. Farberov

  • Gender and Other Psychosocial Factors as Predictors of Adherence to Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy (HAART) in Adults with Comorbid HIV/AIDS, Psychiatric and Substance-related Disorder

    Allison J. Applebaum;Mark A. Richardson;Stephen M. Brady;Deborah J. Brief;Deborah J. Brief

  • Adapting Meaning-Centered Psychotherapy for the palliative care setting: Results of a pilot study:

    Barry Rosenfeld;Rebecca Saracino;Kristen Tobias;Melissa Masterson

  • Prognostic awareness, prognostic communication, and cognitive function in patients with malignant glioma.

    Eli L Diamond;Holly G Prigerson;Denise C Correa;Anne Reiner

  • Participation and interest in support services among family caregivers of older adults with cancer

    J. Nicholas Dionne-Odom;Allison J. Applebaum;Katherine A. Ornstein;Andres Azuero

  • The Impact of Neuropsychological Functioning on Adherence to HAART in HIV-Infected Substance Abuse Patients

    Allison J. Applebaum;Laura C. Reilly;Jeffrey S. Gonzalez;Jeffrey S. Gonzalez;Mark A. Richardson

  • Reducing informal caregiver burden in cancer: evidence-based programs in practice.

    Margaret L Longacre;Allison J Applebaum;Joanne S Buzaglo;Melissa F Miller

Frequent Co-Authors

William Breitbart
William Breitbart Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Barry Rosenfeld
Barry Rosenfeld Fordham University
Lisa M. DeAngelis
Lisa M. DeAngelis Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Robert Zachariae
Robert Zachariae Aarhus University Hospital
Douglas S. Mennin
Douglas S. Mennin Columbia University
Holly G. Prigerson
Holly G. Prigerson Cornell University
Steven A. Safren
Steven A. Safren University of Miami
Katherine N. DuHamel
Katherine N. DuHamel Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Katherine S. Panageas
Katherine S. Panageas Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
David M. Fresco
David M. Fresco University of Michigan–Ann Arbor

If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.

Report an issue

We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below:

Related Online Degrees & Career Pathways

As interest in psychology grows, students have more options than ever for earning degrees online. Many accredited universities now offer flexible online psychology programs that fit a variety of schedules and learning needs. Prospective students looking for the best-ranked psychology degree programs in United States can explore diverse specializations, from clinical and counseling psychology to organizational and forensic paths.

Location also matters for online programs, as in-state tuition and regional accreditation can impact both cost and value. For instance, students in Pennsylvania may want to consider the most valuable online psychology degrees in Philadelphia, which offer strong job placement rates and reputable faculty.

Other regions offer compelling options as well. Those in the Southwest should look into the most valuable psychology degrees in Arizona, while students in the Pacific can find quality programs by reviewing the most valuable psychology degree programs ranking in Hawaii.

Online psychology degrees can lead to careers in mental health services, education, business, and more—offering flexibility and a range of exciting career pathways for graduates.

Best Scientists Citing Allison J. Applebaum

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles