World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Biology and Biochemistry

D-Index
45
Citations
9087
World Ranking
19081
National Ranking
7791

Cindy A. Ryan publication distribution in Biology and Biochemistry in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Biology and Biochemistry in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Cindy A. Ryan sits on this spectrum.

47–56 publications: 8 scientists 57–66 publications: 35 scientists 67–76 publications: 106 scientists 77–86 publications: 231 scientists 87–96 publications: 414 scientists 97–106 publications: 546 scientists 107–116 publications: 704 scientists 117–126 publications: 849 scientists 127–136 publications: 980 scientists 137–146 publications: 942 scientists 147–156 publications: 969 scientists 157–166 publications: 950 scientists 167–176 publications: 951 scientists 177–186 publications: 915 scientists 187–196 publications: 787 scientists 197–206 publications: 841 scientists 207–216 publications: 735 scientists 217–226 publications: 709 scientists 227–236 publications: 651 scientists 237–246 publications: 605 scientists 247–256 publications: 510 scientists 257–266 publications: 524 scientists 267–276 publications: 434 scientists 277–286 publications: 418 scientists 287–296 publications: 350 scientists 297–306 publications: 363 scientists 307–316 publications: 315 scientists 317–326 publications: 296 scientists 327–336 publications: 261 scientists 337–346 publications: 240 scientists 347–356 publications: 219 scientists 357–366 publications: 197 scientists 367–376 publications: 154 scientists 377–386 publications: 161 scientists 387–396 publications: 155 scientists 397–406 publications: 145 scientists 407–416 publications: 124 scientists 417–426 publications: 112 scientists 427–436 publications: 132 scientists 437–446 publications: 116 scientists 447–456 publications: 99 scientists 457–466 publications: 81 scientists 467–476 publications: 91 scientists 477–486 publications: 80 scientists 487–496 publications: 80 scientists 497–506 publications: 60 scientists 507–516 publications: 36 scientists 517–526 publications: 46 scientists 527–536 publications: 54 scientists 537–546 publications: 44 scientists 547–556 publications: 43 scientists 557–566 publications: 43 scientists 567–576 publications: 42 scientists 577–586 publications: 25 scientists 587–596 publications: 34 scientists 597–606 publications: 23 scientists 607–616 publications: 33 scientists 617–626 publications: 31 scientists 627–636 publications: 27 scientists 637–646 publications: 25 scientists 647–656 publications: 28 scientists 657–666 publications: 34 scientists 667–676 publications: 18 scientists 677–686 publications: 16 scientists 687–696 publications: 10 scientists 697–706 publications: 12 scientists 707–716 publications: 21 scientists 717–726 publications: 12 scientists 727–736 publications: 12 scientists 737–746 publications: 10 scientists 747–756 publications: 7 scientists 757–766 publications: 13 scientists 767–776 publications: 15 scientists 777–786 publications: 13 scientists 787–796 publications: 9 scientists 797–806 publications: 9 scientists 807–816 publications: 7 scientists 817–826 publications: 4 scientists 827–836 publications: 9 scientists 837–846 publications: 7 scientists 847–856 publications: 3 scientists 857–866 publications: 5 scientists 867–876 publications: 5 scientists 877–886 publications: 11 scientists 887–896 publications: 3 scientists 897–906 publications: 4 scientists 907–916 publications: 7 scientists 917–926 publications: 5 scientists 927–936 publications: 6 scientists 937–946 publications: 6 scientists 947–956 publications: 3 scientists 957–966 publications: 7 scientists 967–976 publications: 2 scientists 977–986 publications: 2 scientists 987–996 publications: 1 scientists 997–1,006 publications: 5 scientists 1,007–1,016 publications: 2 scientists 1,017–1,026 publications: 2 scientists 1,027 publications: 1 scientists 1,028+ publications: 100 scientists
47 publications 1,028+

This scientist: 80 publications — 1st percentile

1% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 1,028 publications or more.

Cindy A. Ryan D-index placement in Biology and Biochemistry in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Biology and Biochemistry scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Cindy A. Ryan sits on this spectrum.

40–41 D-Index: 80 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 183 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 317 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 504 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 718 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 900 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 1,026 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 1,150 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 1,236 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 1,253 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 1,163 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 1,131 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 1,032 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 897 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 814 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 715 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 709 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 596 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 512 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 473 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 412 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 373 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 358 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 285 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 273 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 227 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 208 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 193 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 153 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 157 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 148 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 120 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 113 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 100 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 86 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 67 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 72 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 73 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 64 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 53 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 60 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 54 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 43 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 38 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 49 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 26 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 18 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 23 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 32 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 32 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 27 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 19 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 22 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 12 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 16 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 14 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 10 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 13 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 10 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 7 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 9 scientists 162–163 D-Index: 13 scientists 164–165 D-Index: 4 scientists 166 D-Index: 4 scientists 167+ D-Index: 98 scientists
40 D-Index 167+

This scientist: 45 D-Index — 3rd percentile

3% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 167 D-Index or more.

Overview

Cindy A. Ryan is a researcher affiliated with Procter & Gamble in the United States. Their work primarily spans the field of psychology, with an emphasis on social psychology. The research addresses various topics related to adventure sports, sensation seeking, recreation, leisure, wilderness management, and aspects of winter sports injuries and performance.

Their recent scholarly contributions include papers published in notable venues such as The Journal of Fandom Studies and Sport in Society. Specific papers authored by Cindy A. Ryan are:

  • "Johnny Cash International: How and Why Fans Love the Man in Black, Michael Hinds and Jonathan Silverman (2020)" published in 2023 in The Journal of Fandom Studies
  • "Mud, sweat and cameras - Irish trail and mountain running vlogging" published in 2024 in Sport in Society

Their research integrates interdisciplinary approaches linking psychological frameworks with sports and leisure studies. The subfield focus includes social psychology, as well as pulmonary and respiratory medicine, reflecting a diversity in methodological and topical engagement.

Publication venues where Cindy A. Ryan has contributed include:

  • The Journal of Fandom Studies
  • Sport in Society

Main research topics investigated by Cindy A. Ryan feature:

  • Adventure Sports and Sensation Seeking
  • Recreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
  • Winter Sports Injuries and Performance

The work does not record frequent co-authors, indicating either a primarily independent research trajectory or collaborations not recurrently documented.

Best Publications

  • Mechanistic applicability domain classification of a local lymph node assay dataset for skin sensitization.

    David W. Roberts;Grace Patlewicz;Petra S. Kern;Frank Gerberick

  • Compilation of historical local lymph node data for evaluation of skin sensitization alternative methods

    G. Frank Gerberick;Cindy A. Ryan;Petra S. Kern;Harald Schlatter

  • A dataset on 145 chemicals tested in alternative assays for skin sensitization undergoing prevalidation.

    Andreas Natsch;Cindy A. Ryan;Leslie Foertsch;Roger Emter

  • Use of the local lymph node assay for the estimation of relative contact allergenic potency.

    D. A. Basketter;L. Blaikie;R. J. Dearman;I. Kimber

  • The local lymph node assay: past, present and future.

    Ian Kimber;R. J. Dearman;D. A. Basketter;C. A. Ryan

  • Further evaluation of the local lymph node assay in the final phase of an international collaborative trial

    S E Loveless;G S Ladics;G F Gerberick;C A Ryan

  • Local lymph node assay: validation assessment for regulatory purposes.

    G F Gerberick;C A Ryan;C A Ryan;Ian Kimber;Ian Kimber;R J Dearman;R J Dearman

  • An international evaluation of the murine local lymph node assay and comparison of modified procedures

    Ian Kimber;Jennifer Hilton;Rebecca J. Dearman;G.Frank Gerberick

  • Local lymph node data for the evaluation of skin sensitization alternatives: a second compilation.

    Petra S Kern;G Frank Gerberick;Cindy A Ryan;Ian Kimber

  • Chemical Allergy: Translating Biology into Hazard Characterization

    Ian Kimber;David A. Basketter;G. Frank Gerberick;Cindy A. Ryan

  • Local lymph node assay (LLNA) for detection of sensitization capacity of chemicals

    G. Frank Gerberick;Cindy A. Ryan;Rebecca J. Dearman;Ian Kimber

  • Contact allergenic potency: correlation of human and local lymph node assay data.

    G. Frank Gerberick;Michael K. Robinson;Cindy A. Ryan;Rebecca J. Dearman

  • Predictive identification of human skin sensitization thresholds

    David A. Basketter;Catherine Clapp;Donna Jefferies;Bob Safford

  • A chemical dataset for evaluation of alternative approaches to skin-sensitization testing.

    G. Frank Gerberick;Cindy A. Ryan;Petra S. Kern;Rebecca J. Dearman

  • Activity of human contact allergens in the murine local lymph node assay

    C. A. Ryan;G. F. Gerberick;L. W. Cruse;D. A. Basketter

  • Gene expression changes in peripheral blood-derived dendritic cells following exposure to a contact allergen.

    Cindy A. Ryan;Lucy A. Gildea;Ben C. Hulette;Rebecca J. Dearman

  • The importance of exposure estimation in the assessment of skin sensitization risk

    M K Robinson;G F Gerberick;C A Ryan;P McNamee

  • Application of the risk assessment paradigm to the induction of allergic contact dermatitis.

    Susan P Felter;Cindy A Ryan;David A Basketter;Nicola J Gilmour

  • Bayesian integrated testing strategy (ITS) for skin sensitization potency assessment: a decision support system for quantitative weight of evidence and adaptive testing strategy

    Joanna S. Jaworska;Andreas Natsch;Cindy Ryan;Judy Strickland

  • Examination of the local lymph node assay for use in contact sensitization risk assessment.

    G F Gerberick;R V House;E R Fletcher;C A Ryan

Frequent Co-Authors

Ian Kimber
Ian Kimber University of Manchester
G. Frank Gerberick
G. Frank Gerberick Procter & Gamble (United States)
David A. Basketter
David A. Basketter University of Bedfordshire
Rebecca J. Dearman
Rebecca J. Dearman University of Manchester
Howard I. Maibach
Howard I. Maibach University of California, San Francisco
Robert Landsiedel
Robert Landsiedel BASF (United States)
Ian R. White
Ian R. White University College London
Klaus Ejner Andersen
Klaus Ejner Andersen University of Southern Denmark
Sebastian Maurer-Stroh
Sebastian Maurer-Stroh Agency for Science, Technology and Research
Marie Cumberbatch
Marie Cumberbatch AstraZeneca (United Kingdom)

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

For students considering a future in Biology and Biochemistry, a variety of online pathways can lead to rewarding careers in healthcare and research. One popular option is exploring dietitian masters programs for those interested in nutrition science and working as registered dietitians. These programs typically cover advanced topics in metabolic pathways, clinical nutrition, and food science.

If you're seeking entry into the medical field, there are convenient online medical assistant programs fafsa approved that provide foundational skills and can often be completed in less than a year. For medical assistants aiming to advance, an ma to lpn bridge program online offers a streamlined path to becoming a licensed practical nurse, opening more clinical opportunities.

Additionally, accelerated options are available for those wishing to obtain a bachelor’s degree more quickly. A bs in biology online can provide a strong scientific foundation and flexibility for working students or those balancing other commitments.

These programs highlight the flexibility and accessibility of science education in the USA, enabling diverse career pathways in healthcare, research, and beyond.

Best Scientists Citing Cindy A. Ryan

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles