World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
37
Citations
8968
World Ranking
8683
National Ranking
3684

Caterina Gratton 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 Caterina Gratton 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: 73 publications — 5th percentile

5% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Caterina Gratton 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 Caterina Gratton 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: 37 D-Index — 10th percentile

10% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Caterina Gratton is affiliated with the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in the United States. Their research primarily spans the fields of neuroscience and medicine, with a notable focus on cognitive neuroscience. The scientist's work also intersects with radiology, nuclear medicine, and imaging, as well as experimental and cognitive psychology, psychiatry, mental health, and neurology.

Gratton's research contributions cover a range of topics including functional brain connectivity studies, neural dynamics and brain function, and advanced neuroimaging techniques and applications. Additional areas of focus include mental health research topics, advanced MRI techniques and applications, neural and behavioral psychology studies, and EEG and brain-computer interfaces.

Frequent publication venues for Gratton's work include bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), NeuroImage, Network Neuroscience, Biological Psychiatry, and Nature. These journals reflect the interdisciplinary nature of the scientist's research output.

The scientist has collaborated extensively with other researchers, with frequent co-authors including Ally Dworetsky, Steven E. Petersen, Evan M. Gordon, Derek M. Smith, and Timothy O. Laumann.

Some notable recent papers by Caterina Gratton include:

  • A somato-cognitive action network alternates with effector regions in motor cortex (2023, Nature)
  • Brain-behavior correlations: Two paths toward reliability (2022, Neuron)
  • Default-mode network streams for coupling to language and control systems (2020, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)
  • Psilocybin desynchronizes the human brain (2024, Nature)
  • Removal of high frequency contamination from motion estimates in single-band fMRI saves data without biasing functional connectivity (2020, NeuroImage)

Best Publications

  • Precision Functional Mapping of Individual Human Brains

    Evan M. Gordon;Timothy O. Laumann;Adrian W. Gilmore;Adrian W. Gilmore;Dillan J. Newbold

  • Functional Brain Networks Are Dominated by Stable Group and Individual Factors, Not Cognitive or Daily Variation

    Caterina Gratton;Timothy O. Laumann;Ashley N. Nielsen;Deanna J. Greene

  • A somato-cognitive action network alternates with effector regions in motor cortex

    Unknown

  • On the Stability of BOLD fMRI Correlations

    Timothy O. Laumann;Abraham Z. Snyder;Anish Mitra;Evan M. Gordon

  • Focal brain lesions to critical locations cause widespread disruption of the modular organization of the brain

    Caterina Gratton;Emi M. Nomura;Fernando Pérez;Mark D'Esposito

  • Spatial and Temporal Organization of the Individual Human Cerebellum

    Scott Marek;Joshua S. Siegel;Evan M. Gordon;Evan M. Gordon;Ryan V. Raut

  • Brain-behavior correlations: Two paths toward reliability

    Unknown

  • Correction of respiratory artifacts in MRI head motion estimates

    Damien A. Fair;Oscar Miranda-Dominguez;Abraham Z. Snyder;Anders Perrone

  • A set of functionally-defined brain regions with improved representation of the subcortex and cerebellum

    Benjamin A. Seitzman;Caterina Gratton;Scott Marek;Ryan V. Raut

  • Trait-like variants in human functional brain networks.

    Benjamin A. Seitzman;Caterina Gratton;Caterina Gratton;Timothy O. Laumann;Evan M. Gordon;Evan M. Gordon

  • Integrative and Network-Specific Connectivity of the Basal Ganglia and Thalamus Defined in Individuals.

    Deanna J. Greene;Scott Marek;Evan M. Gordon;Evan M. Gordon;Joshua S. Siegel

  • Defining Individual-Specific Functional Neuroanatomy for Precision Psychiatry.

    Caterina Gratton;Brian T. Kraus;Deanna J. Greene;Evan M. Gordon

  • Double dissociation of two cognitive control networks in patients with focal brain lesions

    Emi M. Nomura;Caterina Gratton;Renee M. Visser;Andrew Kayser

  • Control networks and hubs

    Caterina Gratton;Haoxin Sun;Steven E. Petersen

  • Default-mode network streams for coupling to language and control systems

    Evan M. Gordon;Evan M. Gordon;Evan M. Gordon;Timothy O. Laumann;Scott Marek;Ryan V. Raut

  • Functional brain network modularity predicts response to cognitive training after brain injury

    Katelyn L. Arnemann;Katelyn L. Arnemann;Katelyn L. Arnemann;Anthony J.-W. Chen;Tatjana Novakovic-Agopian;Caterina Gratton;Caterina Gratton

  • Evidence for Two Independent Factors that Modify Brain Networks to Meet Task Goals

    Caterina Gratton;Timothy O. Laumann;Evan M. Gordon;Babatunde Adeyemo

  • Three Distinct Sets of Connector Hubs Integrate Human Brain Function

    Evan M. Gordon;Evan M. Gordon;Charles J. Lynch;Charles J. Lynch;Caterina Gratton;Timothy O. Laumann

  • The effect of theta-burst TMS on cognitive control networks measured with resting state fMRI.

    Caterina Gratton;Taraz G. Lee;Taraz G. Lee;Emi M. Nomura;Mark D'Esposito

  • Role of frontal and parietal cortices in the control of bottom-up and top-down attention in humans

    Ling Li;Caterina Gratton;Dezhong Yao;Robert T. Knight

  • Age-related frontoparietal changes during the control of bottom-up and top-down attention: an ERP study

    Ling Li;Caterina Gratton;Monica Fabiani;Robert T. Knight

  • The community structure of functional brain networks exhibits scale-specific patterns of inter- and intra-subject variability.

    Richard F. Betzel;Richard F. Betzel;Maxwell A. Bertolero;Evan M. Gordon;Caterina Gratton;Caterina Gratton

Frequent Co-Authors

Bradley L. Schlaggar
Bradley L. Schlaggar Kennedy Krieger Institute
Steven E. Petersen
Steven E. Petersen Washington University in St. Louis
Evan M. Gordon
Evan M. Gordon Washington University in St. Louis
Steven M. Nelson
Steven M. Nelson Louis Stokes Cleveland VA Medical Center
Nico U.F. Dosenbach
Nico U.F. Dosenbach Washington University in St. Louis
Timothy O. Laumann
Timothy O. Laumann Washington University in St. Louis
Abraham Z. Snyder
Abraham Z. Snyder Washington University in St. Louis
Mark D'Esposito
Mark D'Esposito University of California, Berkeley
Kathleen B. McDermott
Kathleen B. McDermott Washington University in St. Louis
Deanna M. Barch
Deanna M. Barch Washington University in St. Louis

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

Pursuing a Neuroscience degree opens doors to a wide range of interdisciplinary career paths. Many students explore related fields through online programs that offer flexibility and affordability. For example, those interested in the therapeutic and counseling aspects of brain science might pursue a masters in marriage and family therapy online, which prepares graduates for client-focused roles in mental health.

Another popular option is earning an online masters psychology, blending research and applied skills relevant to both clinical and academic careers. Students looking for cost-effective routes into mental health or research fields often seek the cheapest psychology degree online, which can provide foundational knowledge for future specialization.

Those interested in broader social and community impact may be drawn to masters in social work online programs. These programs prepare graduates for advocacy, clinical practice, or policy work. Each of these pathways complements a neuroscience background and expands career opportunities across healthcare, research, therapy, and social services.

Best Scientists Citing Caterina Gratton

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles