World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
65
Citations
14008
World Ranking
3136
National Ranking
1462

Catherine M. Cahill 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 Catherine M. Cahill 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: 191 publications — 59th percentile

59% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Catherine M. Cahill 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 Catherine M. Cahill 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: 65 D-Index — 68th percentile

68% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Catherine M. Cahill is affiliated with the University of California, Los Angeles in the United States. Their research spans multiple intersecting fields, including biochemistry, genetics, molecular biology, medicine, and neuroscience. The subfields they focus on notably include molecular biology, cellular and molecular neuroscience, pulmonary and respiratory medicine, pharmacology, and physiology.

Their scholarly output addresses a range of topics central to understanding receptor mechanisms and neurobiology. Main topics of their work include:

  • Neurotransmitter receptor influence on behavior
  • Receptor mechanisms and signaling
  • Neuropeptides and animal physiology
  • Pain mechanisms and treatments
  • Pain management and placebo effect
  • RNA regulation and disease
  • Trace elements in health

Cahill has contributed to multiple peer-reviewed publications across diverse venues. Recent papers include:

  • μ-Opioid Receptors on Distinct Neuronal Populations Mediate Different Aspects of Opioid Reward-Related Behaviors, 2020, eNeuro
  • Iron-responsive-like elements and neurodegenerative ferroptosis, 2020, Learning & Memory
  • In vivo mapping of a GPCR interactome using knockin mice, 2020, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • Kappa Opioid Signaling at the Crossroads of Chronic Pain and Opioid Addiction, 2021, Handbook of experimental pharmacology
  • Pharmacology of boldine: summary of the field and update on recent advances, 2024, Frontiers in Pharmacology

Frequent publication venues in their career include:

  • eNeuro
  • Learning & Memory
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
  • Frontiers in Pharmacology
  • Handbook of experimental pharmacology

Collaborations have been an integral part of Cahill's research. Frequent co-authors comprise:

  • Jack T. Rogers
  • Christopher J. Evans
  • Merel Dagher
  • Amie L. Severino
  • Nitish Mittal

Best Publications

  • TNF-α and neuropathic pain - a review

    Lawrence Leung;Catherine M Cahill

  • Neuropathic pain: a practical guide for the clinician

    Ian Gilron;C. Peter N. Watson;Catherine M. Cahill;Dwight E. Moulin

  • An iron-responsive element type II in the 5'-untranslated region of the Alzheimer's amyloid precursor protein transcript.

    Jack T. Rogers;Jeffrey D. Randall;Catherine M. Cahill;Paul S. Eder

  • Morphine hyperalgesia gated through microglia-mediated disruption of neuronal Cl⁻ homeostasis.

    Francesco Ferrini;Francesco Ferrini;Tuan Trang;Theresa-Alexandra M Mattioli;Sophie Laffray

  • Translation of the alzheimer amyloid precursor protein mRNA is up-regulated by interleukin-1 through 5'-untranslated region sequences.

    Jack T. Rogers;Lorene M. Leiter;Jay McPhee;Catherine M. Cahill

  • The cognitive and neurophysiological basis of emotion dysregulation in bipolar disorder

    Melissa J. Green;Catherine M. Cahill;Catherine M. Cahill;Gin S. Malhi;Gin S. Malhi;Gin S. Malhi

  • Prolonged morphine treatment targets delta opioid receptors to neuronal plasma membranes and enhances delta-mediated antinociception.

    Catherine M. Cahill;Anne Morinville;Anne Morinville;Mao-Cheng Lee;Jean-Pierre Vincent

  • Treating Prolonged Grief Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial

    Richard A. Bryant;Lucy Kenny;Amy Joscelyne;Natasha Rawson

  • Interleukin (IL) 1β Induction of IL-6 Is Mediated by a Novel Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase-dependent AKT/IκB Kinase α Pathway Targeting Activator Protein-1

    Catherine M. Cahill;Jack T. Rogers

  • Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase signaling inhibits DAF-16 DNA binding and function via 14-3-3-dependent and 14-3-3-independent pathways.

    Catherine M. Cahill;Guri Tzivion;Nargis Nasrin;Scott Ogg

  • Fentanyl: Receptor pharmacology, abuse potential, and implications for treatment

    Sandra D. Comer;Catherine M. Cahill

  • Increased Abundance of Opioid Receptor Heteromers After Chronic Morphine Administration

    Achla Gupta;Jan Mulder;Ivone Gomes;Raphael Rozenfeld

  • Up-regulation and trafficking of delta opioid receptor in a model of chronic inflammation: implications for pain control.

    C M Cahill;A Morinville;A Morinville;C Hoffert;D O'Donnell

  • Pain and Poppies: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Opioid Analgesics

    Tuan Trang;Ream Al-Hasani;Daniela Salvemini;Michael W. Salter

  • Mesolimbic dopamine signaling in acute and chronic pain: implications for motivation, analgesia, and addiction

    Anna M.W. Taylor;Susanne Becker;Petra Schweinhardt;Catherine Cahill

  • Treatment of acute stress disorder: a randomized controlled trial.

    Richard A. Bryant;Julie Mastrodomenico;Kim Louise Felmingham;Sally Hopwood

  • DAF-16 recruits the CREB-binding protein coactivator complex to the insulin-like growth factor binding protein 1 promoter in HepG2 cells

    Nargis Nasrin;Scott Ogg;Catherine M. Cahill;William Biggs

  • Executive functioning and theory of mind in euthymic bipolar disorder

    Amanda L Olley;Gin S Malhi;Jennifer Bachelor;Catherine M Cahill

  • Trafficking of δ-opioid receptors and other G-protein-coupled receptors: implications for pain and analgesia

    Catherine M. Cahill;Sarah V. Holdridge;Anne Morinville

  • Selective Translational Control of the Alzheimer Amyloid Precursor Protein Transcript by Iron Regulatory Protein-1

    Hyun Hee Cho;Catherine M. Cahill;Charles R. Vanderburg;Clemens R. Scherzer

  • Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Regulates the Beta Cell Transcription Factor, PDX-1, in Insulinoma Cells

    Xiaolin Wang;Catherine M. Cahill;Marco A. Piñeyro;Jie Zhou

Frequent Co-Authors

Jack T. Rogers
Jack T. Rogers Harvard University
Xudong Huang
Xudong Huang Harvard University
Gin S Malhi
Gin S Malhi University of Sydney
Christopher J. Evans
Christopher J. Evans University of California, Los Angeles
Debomoy K. Lahiri
Debomoy K. Lahiri Indiana University
Richard A. Bryant
Richard A. Bryant University of New South Wales
Mary C. Olmstead
Mary C. Olmstead Queen's University
Ashley I. Bush
Ashley I. Bush Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health
Fudi Wang
Fudi Wang Zhejiang University
Nigel H. Greig
Nigel H. Greig National Institutes of Health

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 Neuroscience in the USA opens doors to many career options in healthcare, research, and technology. Students looking to fast-track their education might consider accelerated programs, which allow for completing a degree in less time than traditional programs.

When deciding what bachelors degree should I get, earning potential and industry growth are important considerations. Neuroscience majors may find lucrative roles in biotechnology, pharmaceuticals, or neuropsychology, fields often featured among the highest paid college majors.

Flexible study options have also grown, making it possible to earn a respected neuroscience degree online. For those concerned about affordability, it's helpful to explore online colleges that offer federal financial aid, making advanced study more accessible.

Ultimately, aligning your degree choice with your career goals and financial needs can set you on a rewarding path in neuroscience or related fields.

Best Scientists Citing Catherine M. Cahill

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles