World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Award Badge
Social Sciences and Humanities
UK
2026

D-Index & Metrics

Social Sciences and Humanities

D-Index
87
Citations
48974
World Ranking
232
National Ranking
41

Andrew Booth publication distribution in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Andrew Booth sits on this spectrum.

44–53 publications: 28 scientists 54–63 publications: 61 scientists 64–73 publications: 161 scientists 74–83 publications: 225 scientists 84–93 publications: 301 scientists 94–103 publications: 390 scientists 104–113 publications: 406 scientists 114–123 publications: 474 scientists 124–133 publications: 453 scientists 134–143 publications: 434 scientists 144–153 publications: 407 scientists 154–163 publications: 411 scientists 164–173 publications: 391 scientists 174–183 publications: 313 scientists 184–193 publications: 319 scientists 194–203 publications: 304 scientists 204–213 publications: 285 scientists 214–223 publications: 246 scientists 224–233 publications: 213 scientists 234–243 publications: 170 scientists 244–253 publications: 167 scientists 254–263 publications: 162 scientists 264–273 publications: 138 scientists 274–283 publications: 138 scientists 284–293 publications: 113 scientists 294–303 publications: 106 scientists 304–313 publications: 95 scientists 314–323 publications: 101 scientists 324–333 publications: 81 scientists 334–343 publications: 69 scientists 344–353 publications: 56 scientists 354–363 publications: 36 scientists 364–373 publications: 42 scientists 374–383 publications: 41 scientists 384–393 publications: 44 scientists 394–403 publications: 27 scientists 404–413 publications: 30 scientists 414–423 publications: 20 scientists 424–433 publications: 29 scientists 434–443 publications: 29 scientists 444–453 publications: 25 scientists 454–463 publications: 19 scientists 464–473 publications: 21 scientists 474–483 publications: 11 scientists 484–493 publications: 17 scientists 494–503 publications: 7 scientists 504–513 publications: 6 scientists 514–523 publications: 12 scientists 524–533 publications: 10 scientists 534–543 publications: 7 scientists 544–553 publications: 6 scientists 554–563 publications: 12 scientists 564–569 publications: 8 scientists 570+ publications: 100 scientists
44 publications 570+

This scientist: 504 publications — 98th percentile

98% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 570 publications or more.

Andrew Booth D-index placement in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Andrew Booth sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 177 scientists 31 D-Index: 210 scientists 32 D-Index: 222 scientists 33 D-Index: 188 scientists 34 D-Index: 181 scientists 35 D-Index: 243 scientists 36 D-Index: 261 scientists 37 D-Index: 272 scientists 38 D-Index: 278 scientists 39 D-Index: 300 scientists 40 D-Index: 297 scientists 41 D-Index: 308 scientists 42 D-Index: 313 scientists 43 D-Index: 300 scientists 44 D-Index: 269 scientists 45 D-Index: 260 scientists 46 D-Index: 228 scientists 47 D-Index: 251 scientists 48 D-Index: 203 scientists 49 D-Index: 186 scientists 50 D-Index: 187 scientists 51 D-Index: 166 scientists 52 D-Index: 138 scientists 53 D-Index: 141 scientists 54 D-Index: 131 scientists 55 D-Index: 137 scientists 56 D-Index: 109 scientists 57 D-Index: 129 scientists 58 D-Index: 95 scientists 59 D-Index: 105 scientists 60 D-Index: 106 scientists 61 D-Index: 86 scientists 62 D-Index: 94 scientists 63 D-Index: 77 scientists 64 D-Index: 79 scientists 65 D-Index: 59 scientists 66 D-Index: 68 scientists 67 D-Index: 51 scientists 68 D-Index: 49 scientists 69 D-Index: 40 scientists 70 D-Index: 43 scientists 71 D-Index: 40 scientists 72 D-Index: 50 scientists 73 D-Index: 46 scientists 74 D-Index: 43 scientists 75 D-Index: 45 scientists 76 D-Index: 45 scientists 77 D-Index: 30 scientists 78 D-Index: 25 scientists 79 D-Index: 31 scientists 80 D-Index: 29 scientists 81 D-Index: 18 scientists 82 D-Index: 21 scientists 83 D-Index: 26 scientists 84 D-Index: 15 scientists 85 D-Index: 15 scientists 86 D-Index: 19 scientists 87 D-Index: 19 scientists 88 D-Index: 12 scientists 89 D-Index: 7 scientists 90 D-Index: 19 scientists 91 D-Index: 20 scientists 92 D-Index: 13 scientists 93 D-Index: 9 scientists 94 D-Index: 13 scientists 95 D-Index: 8 scientists 96 D-Index: 7 scientists 97 D-Index: 6 scientists 98 D-Index: 6 scientists 99 D-Index: 6 scientists 100+ D-Index: 97 scientists
30 D-Index 100+

This scientist: 87 D-Index — 97th percentile

97% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 100 D-Index or more.

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2026 - Research.com Social Sciences and Humanities in United Kingdom Leader Award

Overview

Andrew Booth is affiliated with the University of Sheffield in the United Kingdom. Their research focuses predominantly on the fields of Medicine and Health Professions, with a considerable body of work spanning General Health Professions and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health. Further areas of specialization include Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty, Clinical Psychology, and Sociology and Political Science.

Their publication record reflects sustained contributions to topics such as Health Policy Implementation Science, Meta-analysis and Systematic Reviews, and Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, and Quality of Life. Other notable research topics include the Delphi Technique in Research, Chronic Disease Management Strategies, Emergency and Acute Care Studies, and Health Sciences Research and Education.

Among recent published papers are:

  • "Barriers and facilitators to healthcare workers' adherence with infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases: a rapid qualitative evidence synthesis" (2020, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews)
  • "Critical appraisal" (2021, International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology)
  • "Rapid realist review of the role of community pharmacy in the public health response to COVID-19" (2021, BMJ Open)
  • "Rapid reviews methods series: Guidance on literature search" (2023, BMJ evidence-based medicine)
  • "Behavioural modification interventions for medically unexplained symptoms in primary care: systematic reviews and economic evaluation" (2020, Health Technology Assessment)

Frequent collaboration appears evident with several co-authors, including:

  • Anna Cantrell
  • Duncan Chambers
  • Declan Devane
  • Andrea C. Tricco
  • Christopher Carroll

Andrew Booth's work is regularly published in venues such as BMJ Open, Health and Social Care Delivery Research, SSM Annual Scientific Meeting, BMJ evidence-based medicine, and Health Services and Delivery Research. These outlets reflect an emphasis on health services research and systematic review methodologies.

Best Publications

  • A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies

    Maria J. Grant;Andrew Booth

  • A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity

    Christopher Carroll;Malcolm Patterson;Stephen Wood;Andrew Booth

  • Beyond PICO: The SPIDER Tool for Qualitative Evidence Synthesis

    Alison Cooke;Debbie M Smith;Andrew Booth

  • Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings: introduction to the series

    Simon Arnold Lewin;Simon Arnold Lewin;Andrew Booth;Claire Glenton;Heather Menzies Munthe-Kaas

  • How can systematic reviews incorporate qualitative research? A critical perspective:

    Mary Dixon-Woods;Sheila Bonas;Andrew Booth;David R. Jones

  • Ten principles of good interdisciplinary team work

    Susan A Nancarrow;Andrew Booth;Steven Ariss;Tony Smith

  • Using qualitative evidence in decision making for health and social interventions: an approach to assess confidence in findings from qualitative evidence syntheses (GRADE-CERQual)

    Simon Lewin;Claire Glenton;Heather Munthe-Kaas;Benedicte Carlsen

  • Making sense of complexity in context and implementation: the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework

    Lisa M. Pfadenhauer;Ansgar Gerhardus;Kati Mozygemba;Kristin Bakke Lysdahl

  • Barriers and facilitators to healthcare workers' adherence with infection prevention and control (IPC) guidelines for respiratory infectious diseases: a rapid qualitative evidence synthesis.

    Catherine Houghton;Pauline Meskell;Hannah Delaney;Mike Smalle

  • Appraising qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: a quantitative and qualitative comparison of three methods

    Mary Dixon-Woods;Alex Sutton;Rachel L. Shaw;Tina Miller

  • The effects of integrated care: a systematic review of UK and international evidence

    Susan Baxter;Maxine Johnson;Duncan Chambers;Anthea Sutton

  • “Best fit” framework synthesis: refining the method

    Christopher Carroll;Andrew Booth;Joanna Leaviss;Jo Rick

  • Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: The eMERGe reporting guidance

    Maggie Cunningham;Nicola Ring;Isabelle Uny

  • A review of the use of health status measures in economic evaluation.

    J Brazier;M Deverill;C Green;R Harper

  • Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings-paper 2: how to make an overall CERQual assessment of confidence and create a Summary of Qualitative Findings table

    Simon Arnold Lewin;Simon Arnold Lewin;Meghan Bohren;Arash Rashidian;Arash Rashidian;Heather Menzies Munthe-Kaas

  • Searching for qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: a structured methodological review

    Andrew Booth

  • Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: a literature review of guidance and supporting studies.

    Chris Cooper;Andrew Booth;Jo Varley-Campbell;Nicky Britten

  • COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Studies)

    Andrew Booth;Karin Hannes;Angela Harden;Jane Noyes

  • Air Pollution and Dementia: A Systematic Review

    Ruth Peters;Ruth Peters;Nicole Ee;Jean Peters;Andrew Booth

  • Using the Knowledge to Action Framework in practice: a citation analysis and systematic review

    Becky Field;Andrew Booth;Irene Ilott;Kate Gerrish

  • Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series-paper 3: methods for assessing methodological limitations, data extraction and synthesis, and confidence in synthesized qualitative findings

    Jane Noyes;Andrew Booth;Kate Flemming;Ruth Garside

  • Routine preoperative testing: a systematic review of the evidence.

    J Munro;A Booth;J Nicholl

  • Qualitative Research and Cochrane Reviews

    Jane Noyes;Jennie Popay;Alan Pearson;Karin Hannes

Frequent Co-Authors

Elizabeth Goyder
Elizabeth Goyder University of Sheffield
Simon Lewin
Simon Lewin South African Medical Research Council
Rhiannon Tudor Edwards
Rhiannon Tudor Edwards Bangor University
Cindy-Lee Dennis
Cindy-Lee Dennis University of Toronto
Sarah Stewart-Brown
Sarah Stewart-Brown University of Warwick
Michael Barkham
Michael Barkham University of Sheffield
Mark Stevenson
Mark Stevenson University of Melbourne
Ruth Peters
Ruth Peters Imperial College London
Arash Rashidian
Arash Rashidian World Health Organization
Angela Harden
Angela Harden City, University of London

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

Studying Social Sciences and Humanities in the USA opens doors to careers in counseling, education, policy, and more. Many students now opt for flexible online degrees to fast-track their career or pivot to new opportunities. Choosing the right program is important, as course length, cost, and accreditation all impact your future.

For those interested in mental health and counseling roles, the best online masters in psychology programs provide a blend of theoretical foundations and practical experience, often with affordable tuition. Educators aiming for leadership roles can consider edd degrees that are available in accelerated formats, making it easier for professionals to balance work and studies.

If speed is a priority, options like one year masters programs online let you gain an advanced qualification quickly, helping you stand out in a competitive job market. Likewise, those looking to earn a bachelor’s degree faster can explore accelerated bachelor's degree online pathways, saving both time and tuition.

With so many flexible options, aspiring professionals can personalize their education and career journey to suit their goals and schedules.

Best Scientists Citing Andrew Booth

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles