World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

Charles Poole 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 Charles Poole 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+

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

Charles Poole 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 Charles Poole 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+

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

Best Publications

  • Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration.

    J P Vandenbroucke;E von Elm;E von Elm;D G Altman;P C Gøtzsche

  • Statistical tests, P values, confidence intervals, and power: a guide to misinterpretations

    Sander Greenland;Stephen J. Senn;Kenneth J. Rothman;John B. Carlin

  • Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and elaboration

    Jan P Vandenbroucke;Erik Björn von Elm;Douglas G Altman;Peter C Gøtzsche

  • Neighborhood characteristics associated with the location of food stores and food service places

    Kimberly Morland;Steve Wing;Ana Diez Roux;Charles Poole

  • Bacterial vaginosis and HIV acquisition: A meta-analysis of published studies

    Julius Atashili;Charles L Poole;Peter M. Ndumbe;Adaora A Adimora

  • Illustrating bias due to conditioning on a collider

    Stephen R Cole;Robert W. Platt;Enrique F. Schisterman;Haitao Chu

  • The global prevalence of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Ella T. Nkhoma;Charles Poole;Vani Vannappagari;Susan A. Hall

  • A pooled analysis of magnetic fields, wire codes, and childhood leukemia

    Sander Greenland;Asher R. Sheppard;William T. Kaune;Charles L Poole

  • A meta-analysis of the incidence of non-AIDS cancers in HIV-infected individuals.

    Meredith S. Shiels;Stephen R Cole;Gregory D. Kirk;Charles L Poole

  • Dose-effect relationships of trauma to symptoms of depression and post-traumatic stress disorder among Cambodian survivors of mass violence.

    Richard F. Mollica;Keith McInnes;Charles Poole;Svang Tor

  • Persistent Human Papillomavirus Infection and Cervical Neoplasia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

    J Koshiol;L Lindsay;JM Pimenta;C Poole

  • Does Tea Affect Cardiovascular Disease? A Meta-Analysis

    Ulrike Peters;Charles Poole;Lenore Arab

  • Rethinking the heterosexual infectivity of HIV-1: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Kimberly A Powers;Charles Poole;Audrey E Pettifor;Myron S Cohen

  • Systematic Review Evaluating the Timing of Thoracic Radiation Therapy in Combined Modality Therapy for Limited-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer

    Daniel B. Fried;David E. Morris;Charles Poole;Julian G. Rosenman

  • Preventable Drug-Related Hospital Admissions

    Almut G Winterstein;Brian C Sauer;Charles D Hepler;Charles Poole

  • Random-Effects Meta-Analyses Are Not Always Conservative

    Charles Poole;Sander Greenland

  • Garlic consumption and cancer prevention: meta-analyses of colorectal and stomach cancers

    Aaron T Fleischauer;Charles Poole;Lenore Arab

  • Effects of War Trauma on Cambodian Refugee Adolescents' Functional Health and Mental Health Status

    Richard F. Mollica;Charles Poole;Linda Son;Caroline C. Murray

  • Mejorar la comunicación de estudios observacionales en epidemiología (STROBE): explicación y elaboración

    Jan P. Vandenbroucke;Erik Von Elm;Douglas G. Altman;Peter C. Gøtzsche

  • Mejorar la comunicación de estudios observacionales en epidemiología (STROBE): explicación y elaboración Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration

    Jan P. Vandenbroucke;Erik Von Elm;Douglas G. Altman;Peter C. Gøtzsche

Frequent Co-Authors

Andrew F. Olshan
Andrew F. Olshan University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
David A. Savitz
David A. Savitz Brown University
Kenneth J. Rothman
Kenneth J. Rothman Boston University
Stephen R. Cole
Stephen R. Cole University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Stephen W. Marshall
Stephen W. Marshall University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Til Stürmer
Til Stürmer University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Jay S. Kaufman
Jay S. Kaufman McGill University
David J. Weber
David J. Weber University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Matthias Egger
Matthias Egger University of Bern
Jennifer S. Smith
Jennifer S. Smith University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

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

If you’re interested in a medical career but not ready for the commitment of an MD program, there are many related online degrees and career paths to consider. For those seeking a quicker route into healthcare, lpn program options provide a practical, hands-on entry point. Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN) credentials can be earned online through fast-track programs, allowing you to start working sooner while gaining crucial clinical skills.

For those looking to advance their nursing career, mental health specialties are in high demand. The fastest psychiatric nurse practitioner program options offer a flexible and accelerated path toward serving this critical patient population, with coursework designed for working nurses.

If you are drawn toward leadership roles, exploring the best online mha programs can position you for opportunity in healthcare administration. Cost is a common concern, so it’s wise to consider the cost of mha degree to find affordable and reputable online programs for your career goals.

Best Scientists Citing Charles Poole

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles