World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
84
Citations
27338
World Ranking
15040
National Ranking
1384

Andrew Copas publication distribution in Medicine in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Medicine in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Andrew Copas sits on this spectrum.

101–120 publications: 5 scientists 121–140 publications: 26 scientists 141–160 publications: 73 scientists 161–180 publications: 155 scientists 181–200 publications: 230 scientists 201–220 publications: 363 scientists 221–240 publications: 487 scientists 241–260 publications: 545 scientists 261–280 publications: 722 scientists 281–300 publications: 768 scientists 301–320 publications: 834 scientists 321–340 publications: 895 scientists 341–360 publications: 922 scientists 361–380 publications: 838 scientists 381–400 publications: 861 scientists 401–420 publications: 918 scientists 421–440 publications: 806 scientists 441–460 publications: 771 scientists 461–480 publications: 751 scientists 481–500 publications: 713 scientists 501–520 publications: 617 scientists 521–540 publications: 611 scientists 541–560 publications: 537 scientists 561–580 publications: 504 scientists 581–600 publications: 509 scientists 601–620 publications: 396 scientists 621–640 publications: 386 scientists 641–660 publications: 371 scientists 661–680 publications: 340 scientists 681–700 publications: 336 scientists 701–720 publications: 307 scientists 721–740 publications: 259 scientists 741–760 publications: 230 scientists 761–780 publications: 228 scientists 781–800 publications: 217 scientists 801–820 publications: 204 scientists 821–840 publications: 186 scientists 841–860 publications: 177 scientists 861–880 publications: 155 scientists 881–900 publications: 139 scientists 901–920 publications: 145 scientists 921–940 publications: 116 scientists 941–960 publications: 133 scientists 961–980 publications: 91 scientists 981–1,000 publications: 96 scientists 1,001–1,020 publications: 77 scientists 1,021–1,040 publications: 70 scientists 1,041–1,060 publications: 63 scientists 1,061–1,080 publications: 77 scientists 1,081–1,100 publications: 49 scientists 1,101–1,120 publications: 54 scientists 1,121–1,140 publications: 49 scientists 1,141–1,160 publications: 51 scientists 1,161–1,180 publications: 35 scientists 1,181–1,200 publications: 39 scientists 1,201–1,220 publications: 26 scientists 1,221–1,240 publications: 37 scientists 1,241–1,260 publications: 36 scientists 1,261–1,280 publications: 27 scientists 1,281–1,300 publications: 32 scientists 1,301–1,320 publications: 28 scientists 1,321–1,340 publications: 17 scientists 1,341–1,360 publications: 30 scientists 1,361–1,380 publications: 28 scientists 1,381–1,400 publications: 17 scientists 1,401–1,420 publications: 21 scientists 1,421–1,440 publications: 15 scientists 1,441–1,460 publications: 12 scientists 1,461–1,480 publications: 12 scientists 1,481–1,500 publications: 18 scientists 1,501–1,520 publications: 14 scientists 1,521–1,540 publications: 17 scientists 1,541–1,560 publications: 15 scientists 1,561–1,580 publications: 6 scientists 1,581–1,600 publications: 2 scientists 1,601–1,620 publications: 12 scientists 1,621–1,640 publications: 11 scientists 1,641–1,660 publications: 8 scientists 1,661–1,680 publications: 5 scientists 1,681–1,700 publications: 5 scientists 1,701–1,720 publications: 10 scientists 1,721–1,740 publications: 12 scientists 1,741–1,760 publications: 14 scientists 1,761–1,780 publications: 6 scientists 1,781–1,795 publications: 5 scientists 1,796+ publications: 100 scientists
101 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 468 publications — 52nd percentile

52% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more.

Andrew Copas D-index placement in Medicine in 2026

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

70–71 D-Index: 226 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 391 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 574 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 730 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 891 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 972 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 1,027 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 1,003 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 960 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 970 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 922 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 839 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 808 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 779 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 668 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 611 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 630 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 513 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 541 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 445 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 429 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 400 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 393 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 318 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 302 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 287 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 255 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 256 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 252 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 230 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 179 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 168 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 163 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 159 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 134 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 134 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 118 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 109 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 106 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 74 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 79 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 80 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 87 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 57 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 74 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 69 scientists 162–163 D-Index: 60 scientists 164–165 D-Index: 53 scientists 166–167 D-Index: 39 scientists 168–169 D-Index: 42 scientists 170–171 D-Index: 32 scientists 172–173 D-Index: 39 scientists 174–175 D-Index: 40 scientists 176–177 D-Index: 28 scientists 178–179 D-Index: 19 scientists 180–181 D-Index: 23 scientists 182–183 D-Index: 31 scientists 184–185 D-Index: 18 scientists 186–187 D-Index: 20 scientists 188–189 D-Index: 22 scientists 190–191 D-Index: 13 scientists 192–193 D-Index: 21 scientists 194–195 D-Index: 12 scientists 196–197 D-Index: 12 scientists 198–199 D-Index: 14 scientists 200–201 D-Index: 15 scientists 202–203 D-Index: 13 scientists 204–205 D-Index: 10 scientists 206–207 D-Index: 8 scientists 208–209 D-Index: 4 scientists 210–211 D-Index: 12 scientists 212–213 D-Index: 11 scientists 214–215 D-Index: 10 scientists 216 D-Index: 4 scientists 217+ D-Index: 98 scientists
70 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 84 D-Index — 27th percentile

27% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more.

Overview

Andrew Copas is a researcher affiliated with University College London in the United Kingdom. Their work spans the field of Medicine, with a particular focus on Infectious Diseases, General Health Professions, Statistics and Probability, Health, and Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health.

Their primary research topics include SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research, COVID-19 clinical research studies, adolescent sexual and reproductive health, COVID-19 epidemiological studies, global maternal and child health, statistical methods in clinical trials, and meta-analysis and systematic reviews.

Recent papers by Andrew Copas illustrate engagement with infectious disease epidemiology, vaccine effectiveness, and tuberculosis risk prediction. Notable works include:

  • Vaccine effectiveness of the first dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 against SARS-CoV-2 infection in residents of long-term care facilities in England (VIVALDI): a prospective cohort study, 2021, The Lancet Infectious Diseases
  • Concise whole blood transcriptional signatures for incipient tuberculosis: a systematic review and patient-level pooled meta-analysis, 2020, The Lancet Respiratory Medicine
  • Prevalence and duration of detectable SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibodies in staff and residents of long-term care facilities over the first year of the pandemic (VIVALDI study): prospective cohort study in England, 2021, The Lancet Healthy Longevity
  • Discovery and validation of a personalized risk predictor for incident tuberculosis in low transmission settings, 2020, Nature Medicine
  • Estimands in cluster-randomized trials: choosing analyses that answer the right question, 2022, International Journal of Epidemiology

Copas frequently publishes in venues such as bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), SSRN Electronic Journal, Trials, Wellcome Open Research, and BMJ Open. The distribution of publications highlights a balance between preprint archives, clinical trial-focused journals, and open research platforms.

Co-authorship is a significant aspect of Copas's research practice. Frequent collaborators include Andrew Hayward, Laura Shallcross, Maria Krutikov, Oliver Stirrup, and Catherine H Mercer, with numerous shared publications indicating ongoing research partnerships.

Best Publications

  • Sexual behaviour in Britain: partnerships, practices, and HIV risk behaviours

    Anne M Johnson;Catherine H Mercer;Bob Erens;Andrew J Copas

  • Detection of Kaposi sarcoma associated herpesvirus in peripheral blood of HIV-infected individuals and progression to Kaposi's sarcoma

    D Whitby;C Boshoff;T Hatzioannou;R.A Weiss

  • Sexual behaviour in Britain: early heterosexual experience.

    Kaye Wellings;Kiran Nanchahal;Wendy Macdowall;Sally McManus

  • Changes in sexual attitudes and lifestyles in Britain through the life course and over time: findings from the National Surveys of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal).

    Catherine H Mercer;Clare Tanton;Philip Prah;Bob Erens;Bob Erens

  • Women's groups practising participatory learning and action to improve maternal and newborn health in low-resource settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Audrey Prost;Tim Colbourn;Nadine Seward;Kishwar Azad

  • Sexual function in Britain: findings from the third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3)

    Kirstin R Mitchell;Catherine H Mercer;George B Ploubidis;Kyle G Jones

  • The prevalence of unplanned pregnancy and associated factors in Britain: findings from the third National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal-3)

    Kaye Wellings;Kyle G Jones;Catherine H Mercer;Clare Tanton

  • Sexual behaviour in Britain: reported sexually transmitted infections and prevalent genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection

    Kevin A Fenton;Christos Korovessis;Anne M Johnson;Angela McCadden

  • Comparative community burden and severity of seasonal and pandemic influenza: results of the Flu Watch cohort study

    Andrew C Hayward;Ellen B Fragaszy;Ellen B Fragaszy;Alison Bermingham;Lili Wang

  • Quantifying, displaying and accounting for heterogeneity in the meta-analysis of RCTs using standard and generalised Q statistics.

    Jack Bowden;Jayne F Tierney;Andrew J Copas;Sarah Burdett

  • Reporting of stepped wedge cluster randomised trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement with explanation and elaboration

    Karla Hemming;Monica Taljaard;Monica Taljaard;Joanne E McKenzie;Richard Hooper

  • Prevalence, risk factors, and uptake of interventions for sexually transmitted infections in Britain: findings from the National Surveys of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal)

    Pam Sonnenberg;Soazig Clifton;Simon Beddows;Nigel Field

  • Mortality and causes of death in people diagnosed with HIV in the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy compared with the general population: an analysis of a national observational cohort

    Sara Croxford;Sara Croxford;Aileen Kitching;Sarika Desai;Sarika Desai;Meaghan Kall;Meaghan Kall

  • Tenofovir-associated renal and bone toxicity

    Clare L N Woodward;A M Hall;I G Williams;S Madge

  • Methods for sample size determination in cluster randomized trials

    Clare Rutterford;Andrew Copas;Sandra Eldridge

  • Evaluation of respondent-driven sampling.

    Nicky McCreesh;Simon Frost;Janet Seeley;Janet Seeley;Joseph Katongole

  • Selective versus universal antenatal HIV testing: epidemiological and implementational factors in policy choice.

    A. E. Ades;Ramyani Gupta;Diana M Gibb;Trinh Duong

  • Combining multiple imputation and inverse-probability weighting.

    Shaun R. Seaman;Ian R. White;Andrew J. Copas;Leah Li

  • Effect of remote ischaemic conditioning on clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI): a single-blind randomised controlled trial.

    Derek J Hausenloy;Rajesh K Kharbanda;Ulla Kristine Møller;Manish Ramlall;Manish Ramlall

  • Pupil-led sex education in England (RIPPLE study): cluster-randomised intervention trial

    JM Stephenson;V Strange;S Forrest;A Oakley

Frequent Co-Authors

Catherine H Mercer
Catherine H Mercer University College London
Anne M Johnson
Anne M Johnson University College London
Kaye Wellings
Kaye Wellings London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
Wendy Macdowall
Wendy Macdowall London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
Kevin A. Fenton
Kevin A. Fenton Public Health England
Jackie Cassell
Jackie Cassell Brighton and Sussex Medical School
Robert F. Miller
Robert F. Miller University College London
Graham Hart
Graham Hart University College London
Frances M. Cowan
Frances M. Cowan Imperial College London
Richard Gilson
Richard Gilson University College 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

Exploring Medicine in the USA extends beyond MD programs. Many students and professionals consider alternative healthcare careers and education tracks, many of which can be pursued online at a lower cost and increased flexibility compared to traditional degrees.

For those interested in administrative roles, medical billing and coding online courses cost significantly less than standard full-time study and can open doors to in-demand healthcare jobs.

Aspiring nurses and current RNs may consider the most affordable online nurse practitioner programs to advance their clinical skills and earning potential without pausing their careers. Likewise, an accredited nursing degree online allows for flexibility, which is essential for working adults and caregivers.

For those looking to enter leadership roles or research, accredited online PhD programs in nursing provide an opportunity to achieve the highest academic credentials in nursing from home.

Assess your career goals and lifestyle to find a healthcare pathway that’s right for you—there are more accessible and affordable options than ever before.

Best Scientists Citing Andrew Copas

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles