World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Award Badge
Medicine
Norway
2026

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 136 1921 1792 5 5 388 228177

Andrew D Oxman publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Andrew D Oxman between 1988 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Andrew D Oxman published across 39 years, from 1988 to 2026, averaging 11.5 papers a year. Output peaked at 38 publications in 2009. 12 of the 449 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1988 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 38. Peak 38 publications in 2009. 1988: 1 publication 1989: 4 publications 1990: 3 publications 1991: 3 publications 1992: 6 publications 1993: 13 publications 1994: 8 publications 1995: 9 publications 1996: 4 publications 1997: 1 publication 1998: 5 publications 1999: 3 publications 2000: 8 publications 2001: 12 publications 2002: 16 publications 2003: 13 publications 2004: 8 publications 2005: 19 publications 2006: 29 publications 2007: 19 publications 2008: 25 publications 2009: 38 publications 2010: 11 publications 2011: 19 publications 2012: 8 publications 2013: 17 publications 2014: 9 publications 2015: 11 publications 2016: 6 publications 2017: 24 publications 2018: 10 publications 2019: 9 publications 2020: 8 publications 2021: 3 publications 2022: 28 publications 2023: 14 publications 2024: 13 publications 2025: 11 publications 2026: 1 publication
1988 2026

449 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Andrew D Oxman: publications per year, 1988 to 2026
Year Publications
1988 1
1989 4
1990 3
1991 3
1992 6
1993 13
1994 8
1995 9
1996 4
1997 1
1998 5
1999 3
2000 8
2001 12
2002 16
2003 13
2004 8
2005 19
2006 29
2007 19
2008 25
2009 38
2010 11
2011 19
2012 8
2013 17
2014 9
2015 11
2016 6
2017 24
2018 10
2019 9
2020 8
2021 3
2022 28
2023 14
2024 13
2025 11
2026 1
Total 449
Download as CSV

Andrew D Oxman 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 D Oxman sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600 800
Bar chart with 86 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 101–120 to 1,796+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 922. Most scientists, 922, have 341–360 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 381–400 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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: 610 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
101–120 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 388 publications — 36th percentile

36% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
101–120 5
121–140 26
141–160 73
161–180 155
181–200 230
201–220 363
221–240 487
241–260 545
261–280 722
281–300 768
301–320 834
321–340 895
341–360 922
361–380 838
381–400 861 388
401–420 918
421–440 806
441–460 771
461–480 751
481–500 713
501–520 617
521–540 610
541–560 537
561–580 504
581–600 509
601–620 396
621–640 386
641–660 371
661–680 340
681–700 336
701–720 307
721–740 259
741–760 230
761–780 228
781–800 217
801–820 204
821–840 186
841–860 177
861–880 155
881–900 139
901–920 145
921–940 116
941–960 133
961–980 91
981–1,000 96
1,001–1,020 77
1,021–1,040 70
1,041–1,060 63
1,061–1,080 77
1,081–1,100 49
1,101–1,120 54
1,121–1,140 49
1,141–1,160 51
1,161–1,180 35
1,181–1,200 39
1,201–1,220 26
1,221–1,240 37
1,241–1,260 36
1,261–1,280 27
1,281–1,300 32
1,301–1,320 28
1,321–1,340 17
1,341–1,360 30
1,361–1,380 28
1,381–1,400 17
1,401–1,420 21
1,421–1,440 15
1,441–1,460 12
1,461–1,480 12
1,481–1,500 18
1,501–1,520 14
1,521–1,540 17
1,541–1,560 15
1,561–1,580 6
1,581–1,600 2
1,601–1,620 12
1,621–1,640 11
1,641–1,660 8
1,661–1,680 5
1,681–1,700 5
1,701–1,720 10
1,721–1,740 12
1,741–1,760 14
1,761–1,780 6
1,781–1,795 5
1,796+ 100
Download as CSV

Andrew D Oxman 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 D Oxman sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
250 500 750 1,000
Bar chart with 75 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 70–71 to 217+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 1,027. Most scientists, 1,027, have 82–83 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 136–137 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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: 399 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
70–71 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 136 D-Index — 90th percentile

90% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
70–71 226
72–73 391
74–75 574
76–77 730
78–79 891
80–81 972
82–83 1,027
84–85 1,003
86–87 960
88–89 970
90–91 922
92–93 839
94–95 808
96–97 779
98–99 668
100–101 611
102–103 630
104–105 513
106–107 541
108–109 445
110–111 429
112–113 399
114–115 393
116–117 318
118–119 302
120–121 287
122–123 255
124–125 256
126–127 252
128–129 230
130–131 179
132–133 168
134–135 163
136–137 159 136
138–139 134
140–141 134
142–143 118
144–145 109
146–147 106
148–149 74
150–151 79
152–153 80
154–155 87
156–157 57
158–159 74
160–161 69
162–163 60
164–165 53
166–167 39
168–169 42
170–171 32
172–173 39
174–175 40
176–177 28
178–179 19
180–181 23
182–183 31
184–185 18
186–187 20
188–189 22
190–191 13
192–193 21
194–195 12
196–197 12
198–199 14
200–201 15
202–203 13
204–205 10
206–207 8
208–209 4
210–211 12
212–213 11
214–215 10
216 4
217+ 98
Download as CSV

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2026 - Research.com Medicine in Norway Leader Award
  • 2025 - Research.com Medicine in Norway Leader Award
  • 2023 - Research.com Medicine in Norway Leader Award
  • 2022 - Research.com Medicine in Norway Leader Award

Overview

Andrew D Oxman is affiliated with the Norwegian Institute of Public Health in Norway. Their research spans multiple disciplines within health professions and social sciences, with a particular focus on health sciences research and education, health policy implementation science, and health literacy and information accessibility.

Their academic work covers substantial ground, exploring topics such as education and critical thinking development, misinformation and its impacts, patient-provider communication in healthcare, and educational strategies and epistemologies.

Frequent collaborators in their research include Sarah Rosenbaum, Allen Nsangi, Simon Lewin, Matt Oxman, and Margaret Kaseje.

Andrew D Oxman has published extensively in several venues, including:

  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)
  • F1000Research
  • Trials
  • PLoS ONE
  • Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Their significant recent papers include:

  • Health communication in and out of public health emergencies: to persuade or to inform? (2022, Health Research Policy and Systems)
  • Effects of the Informed Health Choices podcast on the ability of parents of primary school children in Uganda to assess the trustworthiness of claims about treatment effects: one-year follow up of a randomised trial (2020, Trials)
  • Development of a checklist for people communicating evidence-based information about the effects of healthcare interventions: a mixed methods study (2020, BMJ Open)
  • Effects of the Informed Health Choices primary school intervention on the ability of children in Uganda to assess the reliability of claims about treatment effects, 1-year follow-up: a cluster-randomised trial (2020, Trials)
  • Teaching critical thinking about health using digital technology in lower secondary schools in Rwanda: A qualitative context analysis (2021, PLoS ONE)

The main fields of study represented in Andrew D Oxman's body of work include:

  • Health Professions
  • Social Sciences

Within these, subfields of particular focus are:

  • General Health Professions
  • Education
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Health
  • Economics and Econometrics

Best Publications

  • The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

    Julian P T Higgins;Douglas G Altman;Peter C Gøtzsche;Peter Jüni

  • GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations

    Gordon H Guyatt;Andrew David Oxman;Gunn Elisabeth Vist;Regina Kunz

  • Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement

    D Moher;A Liberati;J Tetzlaff;D G Altman

  • GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables

    Gordon Guyatt;Andrew D Oxman;Elie A Akl;Regina Kunz

  • Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

    David Atkins;Dana Best;Peter A Briss;Martin Eccles

  • GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence

    Howard Balshem;Mark Helfand;Mark Helfand;Holger J. Schünemann;Andrew D. Oxman

  • Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes

    Noah Ivers;Gro Jamtvedt;Signe Flottorp;Jane M Young

  • Changing Physician Performance: A Systematic Review of the Effect of Continuing Medical Education Strategies

    DA Davis;MA Thomson;AD Oxman;RB Haynes

  • Evidence-Based Medicine: A New Approach to Teaching the Practice of Medicine

    Gordon Guyatt;John Cairns;David Churchill;Deborah Cook

  • What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians?

    Gordon H Guyatt;Andrew D Oxman;Regina Kunz;Gunn E Vist

  • GRADE guidelines: A new series of articles in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology △

    Gordon H. Guyatt;Andrew D. Oxman;Holger J. Schünemann;Peter Tugwell

  • GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias)

    Gordon H. Guyatt;Andrew D. Oxman;Gunn Vist;Regina Kunz

  • Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings

    Lisa A Bero;Roberto Grilli;Jeremy M Grimshaw;Emma Harvey

  • No magic bullets: a systematic review of 102 trials of interventions to improve professional practice

    A D Oxman;M A Thomson;D A Davis;R B Haynes

  • GRADE guidelines: 6. Rating the quality of evidence-imprecision

    Gordon H. Guyatt;Andrew D. Oxman;Regina Kunz;Jan Brozek

  • GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency

    Gordon H. Guyatt;Andrew D. Oxman;Regina Kunz;James Woodcock

  • Changing provider behavior: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions.

    Jeremy M. Grimshaw;Liz Shirran;Ruth Thomas;Graham Mowatt

  • Going from evidence to recommendations

    Gordon H Guyatt;Andrew D Oxman;Regina Kunz;Yngve Falck-Ytter

  • Continuing education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes

    Louise Forsetlund;Arild Bjørndal;Arash Rashidian;Gro Jamtvedt

  • GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence--indirectness

    Gordon H Guyatt;Andrew D Oxman;Regina Kunz;James Woodcock

Frequent Co-Authors

Atle Fretheim
Atle Fretheim Norwegian Institute of Public Health
Holger J. Schünemann
Holger J. Schünemann Humanitas University
Gordon H. Guyatt
Gordon H. Guyatt McMaster University
Simon Lewin
Simon Lewin South African Medical Research Council
Elie A. Akl
Elie A. Akl American University of Beirut
John N. Lavis
John N. Lavis McMaster University
Roman Jaeschke
Roman Jaeschke McMaster University
Jan Brozek
Jan Brozek McMaster University
Iain Chalmers
Iain Chalmers University of Oxford

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 related online degrees is a smart step for those interested in Medicine in the USA. Not everyone takes the traditional path to become a physician—many fulfilling and high-demand roles are available across healthcare. For instance, those passionate about pharmacy can consider pharmd online programs, which offer flexible schedules and can often be more affordable than on-campus equivalents.

If you are interested in the administrative side of healthcare, a health information management degree online can prepare you for roles handling critical patient data and information systems. Another popular option is medical billing and coding, a growing field suitable for remote work. Wondering about expenses? Discover more about medical billing and coding cost and available courses.

Nursing professionals may also wish to advance their careers through specialized programs. For those seeking flexibility and affordability, check out the cheapest np school options available online. Online healthcare degrees open many doors, letting you forge a rewarding career path in medicine and beyond.

Best Scientists Citing Andrew D Oxman

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles