World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
33
Citations
3634
World Ranking
9473
National Ranking
549

Brian L. Allman 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 Brian L. Allman sits on this spectrum.

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 scientists 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 887+

This scientist: 125 publications — 31st percentile

31% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Brian L. Allman 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 Brian L. Allman sits on this spectrum.

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 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 33 D-Index — 2nd percentile

2% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Brian L. Allman is affiliated with the University of Western Ontario in Canada and focuses on research within the field of neuroscience. Their work spans various subfields including cognitive neuroscience, sensory systems, neurology, cellular and molecular neuroscience, and molecular biology.

The scientist's research covers main topics such as hearing, cochlea, tinnitus, and genetics; autism spectrum disorder research; neuroinflammation and neurodegeneration mechanisms; neural dynamics and brain function; neuroendocrine regulation and behavior; biochemical analysis and sensing techniques; and neuroscience and neuropharmacology research.

Brian L. Allman has authored several recent papers, among them:

  • Loss of Cntnap2 in the Rat Causes Autism-Related Alterations in Social Interactions, Stereotypic Behavior, and Sensory Processing (2020, Autism Research)
  • Uncovering the contribution of enhanced central gain and altered cortical oscillations to tinnitus generation (2020, Progress in Neurobiology)
  • GJB2 Mutations Linked to Hearing Loss Exhibit Differential Trafficking and Functional Defects as Revealed in Cochlear-Relevant Cells (2020, Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology)
  • TSPO PET detects acute neuroinflammation but not diffuse chronically activated MHCII microglia in the rat (2020, EJNMMI Research)
  • Differential Plasticity in Auditory and Prefrontal Cortices, and Cognitive-Behavioral Deficits Following Noise-Induced Hearing Loss (2020, Neuroscience)

Frequent coauthors of Brian L. Allman include:

  • Ashley L. Schormans
  • Susanne Schmid
  • Shawn N. Whitehead
  • Kaela E. Scott
  • Sarah H. Hayes

The scientist regularly publishes in venues such as:

  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • Frontiers in Neuroscience
  • The FASEB Journal
  • Autism Research
  • Neuroscience

Best Publications

  • Neuromuscular fatigue and aging: central and peripheral factors.

    Brian L. Allman;Charles L. Rice

  • Review: Ototoxic Characteristics of Platinum Antitumor Drugs

    Dalian Ding;Brian L. Allman;Richard Salvi

  • Adult deafness induces somatosensory conversion of ferret auditory cortex

    Brian L. Allman;Leslie P. Keniston;M. Alex Meredith

  • The gap-startle paradigm for tinnitus screening in animal models: limitations and optimization.

    Edward Lobarinas;Sarah H. Hayes;Brian L. Allman

  • Cisplatin ototoxicity in rat cochlear organotypic cultures.

    Dalian Ding;Jingchun He;Brian L. Allman;Dongzhen Yu

  • Multisensory Processing in “Unimodal” Neurons: Cross-Modal Subthreshold Auditory Effects in Cat Extrastriate Visual Cortex

    Brian L. Allman;M. Alex Meredith

  • Incomplete recovery of voluntary isometric force after fatigue is not affected by old age.

    Brian L. Allman;Charles L. Rice

  • Salicylate toxicity model of tinnitus

    Daniel J. Stolzberg;Richard J. Salvi;Brian L. Allman

  • Salicylate-induced peripheral auditory changes and tonotopic reorganization of auditory cortex.

    Daniel Stolzberg;Guang-Di Chen;Brian L. Allman;Richard J. Salvi

  • Not Just for Bimodal Neurons Anymore: The Contribution of Unimodal Neurons to Cortical Multisensory Processing

    Brian L. Allman;Leslie P. Keniston;M. Alex Meredith

  • Differential age‐related changes in motor unit properties between elbow flexors and extensors

    B. H. Dalton;J. M. Jakobi;B. L. Allman;C. L. Rice

  • Multisensory dysfunction accompanies crossmodal plasticity following adult hearing impairment.

    M.A. Meredith;L.P. Keniston;B.L. Allman

  • Do Cross-Modal Projections Always Result in Multisensory Integration?

    Brian L. Allman;Ruben E. Bittencourt-Navarrete;Leslie P. Keniston;Alexandre E. Medina

  • Subthreshold multisensory processing in cat auditory cortex.

    M. Alex Meredith;Brian L. Allman

  • Perceived exertion is elevated in old age during an isometric fatigue task

    Brian L. Allman;Charles L. Rice

  • Altered Auditory Processing, Filtering, and Reactivity in the Cntnap2 Knock-Out Rat Model for Neurodevelopmental Disorders

    Kaela E. Scott;Ashley L. Schormans;Katharine Y. Pacoli;Cleusa De Oliveira

  • Δ-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol produce dissociable effects on prefrontal cortical executive function and regulation of affective behaviors.

    Hanna Szkudlarek;Sagar Jayawantrao Desai;Justine Renard;Brian J Pereira

  • What we can learn from a genetic rodent model about autism.

    Dorit Möhrle;Marta Fernández;Olga Peñagarikano;Andreas Frick

  • Loss of Cntnap2 in the Rat Causes Autism-Related Alterations in Social Interactions, Stereotypic Behavior, and Sensory Processing.

    Kaela E Scott;Karnig Kazazian;Rajkamalpreet S Mann;Dorit Möhrle

  • Single-unit analysis of somatosensory processing in the core auditory cortex of hearing ferrets.

    M. Alex Meredith;Brian L. Allman

  • Early hearing-impairment results in crossmodal reorganization of ferret core auditory cortex.

    M. Alex Meredith;Brian L. Allman

Frequent Co-Authors

M. Alex Meredith
M. Alex Meredith Virginia Commonwealth University
Richard Salvi
Richard Salvi University at Buffalo, State University of New York
Nagalingam Rajakumar
Nagalingam Rajakumar University of Western Ontario
Dale W. Laird
Dale W. Laird University of Western Ontario
Vladimir Hachinski
Vladimir Hachinski University of Western Ontario
Krzysztof J. Cios
Krzysztof J. Cios Virginia Commonwealth University
Ryan A. Stevenson
Ryan A. Stevenson University of Western Ontario
Berthold Langguth
Berthold Langguth University of Regensburg
Guang-Di Chen
Guang-Di Chen University at Buffalo, State University of New York
Steven R. Laviolette
Steven R. Laviolette University of Western Ontario

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 neuroscience opens up diverse career pathways, both in research and applied settings. Many students interested in the brain and behavior often explore related fields—such as counseling, psychology, or family therapy—that allow them to make a direct impact on people’s lives.

For those seeking accredited and flexible options, cacrep accredited programs online ensure a high standard of education in counseling. Additionally, prospective counselors can explore online masters counseling programs to obtain advanced credentials while balancing other commitments.

If you are interested in specializing in relationships and therapy, consider the best online mft programs for marriage and family therapy. Alternatively, those fascinated by broader aspects of human behavior may opt for an online psychology masters degree, which can pave the way for roles in research, education, or mental health services.

Exploring these linked degrees can provide valuable alternatives and complement a background in neuroscience, opening doors to rewarding and impactful careers.

Best Scientists Citing Brian L. Allman

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles