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
Neuroscience 60 3909 3579 1774 1599 210 9953

Amy K. Wagner publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Amy K. Wagner between 1999 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Amy K. Wagner published across 27 years, from 1999 to 2025, averaging 9 papers a year. Output peaked at 24 publications in 2015. 26 of the 242 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1999 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 24. Peak 24 publications in 2015. 1999: 1 publication 2000: 3 publications 2001: 2 publications 2002: 2 publications 2003: 2 publications 2004: 4 publications 2005: 12 publications 2006: 3 publications 2007: 6 publications 2008: 3 publications 2009: 4 publications 2010: 10 publications 2011: 6 publications 2012: 4 publications 2013: 12 publications 2014: 13 publications 2015: 24 publications 2016: 20 publications 2017: 17 publications 2018: 8 publications 2019: 15 publications 2020: 11 publications 2021: 20 publications 2022: 6 publications 2023: 8 publications 2024: 16 publications 2025: 10 publications
1999 2025

242 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Amy K. Wagner: publications per year, 1999 to 2025
Year Publications
1999 1
2000 3
2001 2
2002 2
2003 2
2004 4
2005 12
2006 3
2007 6
2008 3
2009 4
2010 10
2011 6
2012 4
2013 12
2014 13
2015 24
2016 20
2017 17
2018 8
2019 15
2020 11
2021 20
2022 6
2023 8
2024 16
2025 10
Total 242
Download as CSV

Amy K. Wagner publication distribution in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Neuroscience in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Amy K. Wagner sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400 500
Bar chart with 86 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 38–47 to 887+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 539. Most scientists, 539, have 98–107 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 208–217 publications, is where this scientist sits. 38–47 publications: 18 scientists 48–57 publications: 79 scientists 58–67 publications: 193 scientists 68–77 publications: 323 scientists 78–87 publications: 406 scientists 88–97 publications: 452 scientists 98–107 publications: 539 scientists 108–117 publications: 505 scientists 118–127 publications: 522 scientists 128–137 publications: 469 scientists 138–147 publications: 456 scientists 148–157 publications: 459 scientists 158–167 publications: 397 scientists 168–177 publications: 383 scientists 178–187 publications: 350 scientists 188–197 publications: 302 scientists 198–207 publications: 306 scientists 208–217 publications: 262 scientists 218–227 publications: 242 scientists 228–237 publications: 220 scientists 238–247 publications: 203 scientists 248–257 publications: 174 scientists 258–267 publications: 176 scientists 268–277 publications: 175 scientists 278–287 publications: 125 scientists 288–297 publications: 116 scientists 298–307 publications: 127 scientists 308–317 publications: 128 scientists 318–327 publications: 99 scientists 328–337 publications: 89 scientists 338–347 publications: 78 scientists 348–357 publications: 96 scientists 358–367 publications: 66 scientists 368–377 publications: 59 scientists 378–387 publications: 65 scientists 388–397 publications: 54 scientists 398–407 publications: 48 scientists 408–417 publications: 49 scientists 418–427 publications: 34 scientists 428–437 publications: 31 scientists 438–447 publications: 30 scientists 448–457 publications: 31 scientists 458–467 publications: 36 scientists 468–477 publications: 40 scientists 478–487 publications: 35 scientists 488–497 publications: 30 scientists 498–507 publications: 23 scientists 508–517 publications: 26 scientists 518–527 publications: 20 scientists 528–537 publications: 23 scientists 538–547 publications: 20 scientists 548–557 publications: 20 scientists 558–567 publications: 17 scientists 568–577 publications: 14 scientists 578–587 publications: 20 scientists 588–597 publications: 20 scientists 598–607 publications: 19 scientists 608–617 publications: 18 scientists 618–627 publications: 17 scientists 628–637 publications: 11 scientists 638–647 publications: 11 scientists 648–657 publications: 11 scientists 658–667 publications: 8 scientists 668–677 publications: 7 scientists 678–687 publications: 11 scientists 688–697 publications: 10 scientists 698–707 publications: 4 scientists 708–717 publications: 6 scientists 718–727 publications: 5 scientists 728–737 publications: 5 scientists 738–747 publications: 9 scientists 748–757 publications: 9 scientists 758–767 publications: 3 scientists 768–777 publications: 7 scientists 778–787 publications: 7 scientists 788–797 publications: 6 scientists 798–807 publications: 2 scientists 808–817 publications: 2 scientists 818–827 publications: 7 scientists 828–837 publications: 0 scientists 838–847 publications: 9 scientists 848–857 publications: 3 scientists 858–867 publications: 1 scientist 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38–47 publications 887+

This scientist: 210 publications — 65th percentile

65% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Neuroscience scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,597 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
38–47 18
48–57 79
58–67 193
68–77 323
78–87 406
88–97 452
98–107 539
108–117 505
118–127 522
128–137 469
138–147 456
148–157 459
158–167 397
168–177 383
178–187 350
188–197 302
198–207 306
208–217 262 210
218–227 242
228–237 220
238–247 203
248–257 174
258–267 176
268–277 175
278–287 125
288–297 116
298–307 127
308–317 128
318–327 99
328–337 89
338–347 78
348–357 96
358–367 66
368–377 59
378–387 65
388–397 54
398–407 48
408–417 49
418–427 34
428–437 31
438–447 30
448–457 31
458–467 36
468–477 40
478–487 35
488–497 30
498–507 23
508–517 26
518–527 20
528–537 23
538–547 20
548–557 20
558–567 17
568–577 14
578–587 20
588–597 20
598–607 19
608–617 18
618–627 17
628–637 11
638–647 11
648–657 11
658–667 8
668–677 7
678–687 11
688–697 10
698–707 4
708–717 6
718–727 5
728–737 5
738–747 9
748–757 9
758–767 3
768–777 7
778–787 7
788–797 6
798–807 2
808–817 2
818–827 7
828–837 0
838–847 9
848–857 3
858–867 1
868–877 3
878–886 6
887+ 100
Download as CSV

Amy K. Wagner D-index placement in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Neuroscience scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Amy K. Wagner sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400 500
Bar chart with 68 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 163+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 512. Most scientists, 512, have 46–47 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 60–61 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 30–31 D-Index: 42 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 172 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 296 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 435 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 459 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 456 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 467 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 478 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 512 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 435 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 425 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 418 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 392 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 357 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 334 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 328 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 260 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 278 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 239 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 250 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 210 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 200 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 189 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 170 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 146 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 113 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 126 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 100 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 84 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 99 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 84 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 85 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 72 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 76 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 45 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 49 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 43 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 32 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 45 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 50 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 32 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 39 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 29 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 27 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 19 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 23 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 27 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 16 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 24 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 13 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 21 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 17 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 14 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 15 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 10 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 10 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 13 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 9 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 8 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 6 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 6 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 7 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 7 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 10 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 4 scientists 162 D-Index: 8 scientists 163+ D-Index: 100 scientists
30–31 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 60 D-Index — 61st percentile

61% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Neuroscience scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,597 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 42
32–33 172
34–35 296
36–37 435
38–39 459
40–41 456
42–43 467
44–45 478
46–47 512
48–49 435
50–51 425
52–53 418
54–55 392
56–57 357
58–59 334
60–61 328 60
62–63 260
64–65 278
66–67 239
68–69 250
70–71 210
72–73 200
74–75 189
76–77 170
78–79 146
80–81 113
82–83 126
84–85 100
86–87 84
88–89 99
90–91 84
92–93 85
94–95 72
96–97 76
98–99 45
100–101 49
102–103 43
104–105 32
106–107 45
108–109 50
110–111 32
112–113 39
114–115 32
116–117 29
118–119 27
120–121 19
122–123 23
124–125 27
126–127 16
128–129 24
130–131 13
132–133 21
134–135 17
136–137 14
138–139 15
140–141 10
142–143 10
144–145 13
146–147 9
148–149 8
150–151 6
152–153 6
154–155 7
156–157 7
158–159 10
160–161 4
162 8
163+ 100
Download as CSV

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2020 - Member of the National Academy of Medicine (NAM)

Overview

Amy K. Wagner is affiliated with the University of Pittsburgh in the United States. Their primary research is situated within the field of Medicine, contributing extensively to multiple subfields including Neurology, Epidemiology, Emergency Medicine, Molecular Biology, and Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine.

Their work frequently appears in several publication venues, notably:

  • Neurocritical Care
  • Journal of Neurotrauma
  • Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation
  • Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
  • Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society

Amy K. Wagner's research covers a range of topics, with a strong focus on:

  • Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
  • S100 Proteins and Annexins
  • Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
  • Trauma and Emergency Care Studies
  • Suicide and Self-Harm Studies

Selected recent papers by Amy K. Wagner include:

  • "The Curing Coma Campaign: Framing Initial Scientific Challenges-Proceedings of the First Curing Coma Campaign Scientific Advisory Council Meeting" (2020), Neurocritical Care
  • "Therapies to Restore Consciousness in Patients with Severe Brain Injuries: A Gap Analysis and Future Directions" (2021), Neurocritical Care
  • "A Precision Medicine Framework for Classifying Patients with Disorders of Consciousness: Advanced Classification of Consciousness Endotypes (ACCESS)" (2021), Neurocritical Care
  • "Proceedings of the First Curing Coma Campaign NIH Symposium: Challenging the Future of Research for Coma and Disorders of Consciousness" (2021), Neurocritical Care
  • "Proceedings from the Consensus Conference on Trauma Patient-Reported Outcome Measures" (2020), Journal of the American College of Surgeons

The scientist collaborates frequently with several coauthors, including:

  • Raj G. Kumar
  • Shannon B. Juengst
  • Richard Rubenstein
  • Kevin Wang
  • John B. Williamson

Amy K. Wagner was recognized as a Member of the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) in 2020.

Best Publications

  • Concussion in sports: postconcussive activity levels, symptoms, and neurocognitive performance.

    Cynthia W. Majerske;Jason P. Mihalik;Dianxu Ren;Michael W. Collins

  • Persistent cognitive dysfunction after traumatic brain injury: A dopamine hypothesis

    James W. Bales;Amy K. Wagner;Anthony E. Kline;C. Edward Dixon

  • Biomarkers of primary and evolving damage in traumatic and ischemic brain injury: diagnosis, prognosis, probing mechanisms, and therapeutic decision making.

    Patrick M Kochanek;Rachel P Berger;Hülya Bayir;Amy K Wagner

  • S100b as a prognostic biomarker in outcome prediction for patients with severe traumatic brain injury.

    Akash Goyal;Michelle D. Failla;Christian Niyonkuru;Krutika Amin

  • Chronic Inflammation After Severe Traumatic Brain Injury: Characterization and Associations With Outcome at 6 and 12 Months Postinjury.

    Raj G. Kumar;Jennifer A. Boles;Amy K. Wagner

  • IL‐1β associations with posttraumatic epilepsy development: A genetics and biomarker cohort study

    Matthew L. Diamond;Anne C. Ritter;Michelle D. Failla;Jennifer A. Boles

  • Acute Serum Hormone Levels: Characterization and Prognosis after Severe Traumatic Brain Injury

    Amy K. Wagner;Emily H. McCullough;Christian Niyonkuru;Haishin Ozawa

  • Acute CSF interleukin-6 trajectories after TBI: associations with neuroinflammation, polytrauma, and outcome.

    R.G. Kumar;M.L. Diamond;J.A. Boles;R.P. Berger

  • Evaluation of estrous cycle stage and gender on behavioral outcome after experimental traumatic brain injury

    Amy K. Wagner;Lauren A. Willard;Anthony E. Kline;Michael K. Wenger

  • Controlled cortical impact injury affects dopaminergic transmission in the rat striatum.

    A. K. Wagner;J. E. Sokoloski;D. Ren;X. Chen

  • Relationships between cerebrospinal fluid markers of excitotoxicity, ischemia, and oxidative damage after severe TBI: the impact of gender, age, and hypothermia

    Amy K. Wagner;Hülya Bayir;Dianxu Ren;Ava Puccio

  • Return to Productive Activity After Traumatic Brain Injury: Relationship With Measures of Disability, Handicap, and Community Integration

    Amy K. Wagner;Flora M. Hammond;Howell C. Sasser;David Wiercisiewski

  • Emerging therapies in traumatic brain injury.

    Patrick M. Kochanek;Travis C. Jackson;Nikki Miller Ferguson;Shaun W. Carlson

  • Incidence and risk factors of posttraumatic seizures following traumatic brain injury: A Traumatic Brain Injury Model Systems Study.

    Anne C. Ritter;Amy K. Wagner;Anthony Fabio;Mary Jo Pugh

  • Trajectory analysis of serum biomarker concentrations facilitates outcome prediction after pediatric traumatic and hypoxemic brain injury.

    Rachel Pardes Berger;Michael C. Bazaco;Amy K. Wagner;Patrick M. Kochanek

  • Intentional traumatic brain injury: epidemiology, risk factors, and associations with injury severity and mortality.

    Amy Kathleen Wagner;Howell Crawford Sasser;Flora Mc Connell Hammond;David Wiercisiewski

  • Group-based trajectory analysis applications for prognostic biomarker model development in severe TBI: a practical example.

    Christian Niyonkuru;Amy K. Wagner;Haishin Ozawa;Krutika Amin

  • Intervention with environmental enrichment after experimental brain trauma enhances cognitive recovery in male but not female rats.

    Amy K Wagner;Anthony E Kline;Joshua Sokoloski;Ross D Zafonte

  • The Curing Coma Campaign: Framing Initial Scientific Challenges-Proceedings of the First Curing Coma Campaign Scientific Advisory Council Meeting.

    J Javier Provencio;J Claude Hemphill;Jan Claassen;Brian L Edlow

  • Therapies to Restore Consciousness in Patients with Severe Brain Injuries: A Gap Analysis and Future Directions.

    Brian L Edlow;Leandro R D Sanz;Len Polizzotto;Nader Pouratian

  • Gender and environmental effects on regional brain-derived neurotrophic factor expression after experimental traumatic brain injury.

    X. Chen;Y. Li;A.E. Kline;C.E. Dixon

  • Acute treatment with the 5-HT1A receptor agonist 8-OH-DPAT and chronic environmental enrichment confer neurobehavioral benefit after experimental brain trauma

    Anthony E. Kline;Amy K. Wagner;Brian P. Westergom;Rebecca R. Malena

Frequent Co-Authors

Ross Zafonte
Ross Zafonte Harvard Medical School
Patrick M. Kochanek
Patrick M. Kochanek University of Pittsburgh
C. Edward Dixon
C. Edward Dixon University of Pittsburgh
Anthony E. Kline
Anthony E. Kline University of Pittsburgh
Sarah L. Berga
Sarah L. Berga University at Buffalo, State University of New York
Robert S. B. Clark
Robert S. B. Clark University of Pittsburgh
Hülya Bayır
Hülya Bayır University of Pittsburgh
Kevin K. W. Wang
Kevin K. W. Wang Morehouse School of Medicine
Jerzy P. Szaflarski
Jerzy P. Szaflarski University of Alabama at Birmingham
Joseph T. Giacino
Joseph T. Giacino Massachusetts General Hospital

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

Exploring neuroscience can open doors to many rewarding careers. If you're thinking about the highest paying majors in this field, neuroscience stands out for its potential—offering roles in medicine, technology, and research.

Many students consider flexibility and affordability when choosing their path. There are numerous colleges online that accept fafsa, making it possible to finance your education with federal aid and explore online neuroscience programs from home.

To enhance your credentials, you might look into certificates i can get online. These can boost your resume in specialized areas like neuroimaging, data science, or clinical research, helping you stand out in the job market.

If you're seeking a flexible learning path, browse online degree programs that align with your goals. Online learning can be a great way to balance studies, work, and personal commitments while preparing for a rewarding neuroscience career.

Best Scientists Citing Amy K. Wagner

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles