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

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Social Sciences and Humanities 87 232 195 41 35 504 48974

Andrew Booth publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Andrew Booth between 1990 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Andrew Booth published across 36 years, from 1990 to 2025, averaging 18.2 papers a year. Output peaked at 77 publications in 2016. 53 of the 656 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
25 50 75
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1990 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 77. Peak 77 publications in 2016. 1990: 1 publication 1991: 1 publication 1992: 0 publications 1993: 1 publication 1994: 0 publications 1995: 1 publication 1996: 2 publications 1997: 8 publications 1998: 5 publications 1999: 10 publications 2000: 10 publications 2001: 14 publications 2002: 10 publications 2003: 17 publications 2004: 22 publications 2005: 12 publications 2006: 14 publications 2007: 12 publications 2008: 14 publications 2009: 14 publications 2010: 16 publications 2011: 15 publications 2012: 14 publications 2013: 17 publications 2014: 29 publications 2015: 42 publications 2016: 77 publications 2017: 37 publications 2018: 39 publications 2019: 37 publications 2020: 37 publications 2021: 37 publications 2022: 19 publications 2023: 19 publications 2024: 31 publications 2025: 22 publications
1990 2025

656 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Andrew Booth: publications per year, 1990 to 2025
Year Publications
1990 1
1991 1
1992 0
1993 1
1994 0
1995 1
1996 2
1997 8
1998 5
1999 10
2000 10
2001 14
2002 10
2003 17
2004 22
2005 12
2006 14
2007 12
2008 14
2009 14
2010 16
2011 15
2012 14
2013 17
2014 29
2015 42
2016 77
2017 37
2018 39
2019 37
2020 37
2021 37
2022 19
2023 19
2024 31
2025 22
Total 656
Download as CSV

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.

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400
Bar chart with 54 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 44–53 to 570+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 474. Most scientists, 474, have 114–123 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 570 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 504–513 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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
44–53 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.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 7,777 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
44–53 28
54–63 61
64–73 161
74–83 225
84–93 301
94–103 390
104–113 406
114–123 474
124–133 453
134–143 434
144–153 407
154–163 411
164–173 391
174–183 313
184–193 319
194–203 304
204–213 285
214–223 246
224–233 213
234–243 170
244–253 167
254–263 162
264–273 138
274–283 138
284–293 113
294–303 106
304–313 95
314–323 101
324–333 81
334–343 69
344–353 56
354–363 36
364–373 42
374–383 41
384–393 44
394–403 27
404–413 30
414–423 20
424–433 29
434–443 29
444–453 25
454–463 19
464–473 21
474–483 11
484–493 17
494–503 7
504–513 6 504
514–523 12
524–533 10
534–543 7
544–553 6
554–563 12
564–569 8
570+ 100
Download as CSV

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.

No. of scientists
100 200 300
Bar chart with 71 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30 to 100+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 313. Most scientists, 313, have 42 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 100 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 87 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 7,777 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30 177
31 210
32 222
33 188
34 181
35 243
36 261
37 272
38 278
39 300
40 297
41 308
42 313
43 300
44 269
45 260
46 228
47 251
48 203
49 186
50 187
51 166
52 138
53 141
54 131
55 137
56 109
57 129
58 95
59 105
60 106
61 86
62 94
63 77
64 79
65 59
66 68
67 51
68 49
69 40
70 43
71 40
72 50
73 46
74 43
75 45
76 45
77 30
78 25
79 31
80 29
81 18
82 21
83 26
84 15
85 15
86 19
87 19 87
88 12
89 7
90 19
91 20
92 13
93 9
94 13
95 8
96 7
97 6
98 6
99 6
100+ 97
Download as CSV

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