World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 92 11081 10411 1046 999 468 48346

Daniel F. McAuley publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Daniel F. McAuley between 1992 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Daniel F. McAuley published across 35 years, from 1992 to 2026, averaging 14.1 papers a year. Output peaked at 47 publications in 2020. 40 of the 492 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30 40
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1992 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 47. Peak 47 publications in 2020. 1992: 1 publication 1993: 0 publications 1994: 0 publications 1995: 0 publications 1996: 0 publications 1997: 2 publications 1998: 4 publications 1999: 3 publications 2000: 5 publications 2001: 6 publications 2002: 6 publications 2003: 6 publications 2004: 6 publications 2005: 6 publications 2006: 6 publications 2007: 4 publications 2008: 13 publications 2009: 20 publications 2010: 23 publications 2011: 29 publications 2012: 25 publications 2013: 26 publications 2014: 30 publications 2015: 25 publications 2016: 22 publications 2017: 36 publications 2018: 26 publications 2019: 30 publications 2020: 47 publications 2021: 44 publications 2022: 1 publication 2023: 0 publications 2024: 0 publications 2025: 39 publications 2026: 1 publication
1992 2026

492 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Daniel F. McAuley: publications per year, 1992 to 2026
Year Publications
1992 1
1993 0
1994 0
1995 0
1996 0
1997 2
1998 4
1999 3
2000 5
2001 6
2002 6
2003 6
2004 6
2005 6
2006 6
2007 4
2008 13
2009 20
2010 23
2011 29
2012 25
2013 26
2014 30
2015 25
2016 22
2017 36
2018 26
2019 30
2020 47
2021 44
2022 1
2023 0
2024 0
2025 39
2026 1
Total 492
Download as CSV

Daniel F. McAuley 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 Daniel F. McAuley sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600 800
Bar chart with 86 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 101–120 to 1,796+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 922. Most scientists, 922, have 341–360 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 461–480 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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: 610 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
101–120 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 468 publications — 52nd percentile

52% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
101–120 5
121–140 26
141–160 73
161–180 155
181–200 230
201–220 363
221–240 487
241–260 545
261–280 722
281–300 768
301–320 834
321–340 895
341–360 922
361–380 838
381–400 861
401–420 918
421–440 806
441–460 771
461–480 751 468
481–500 713
501–520 617
521–540 610
541–560 537
561–580 504
581–600 509
601–620 396
621–640 386
641–660 371
661–680 340
681–700 336
701–720 307
721–740 259
741–760 230
761–780 228
781–800 217
801–820 204
821–840 186
841–860 177
861–880 155
881–900 139
901–920 145
921–940 116
941–960 133
961–980 91
981–1,000 96
1,001–1,020 77
1,021–1,040 70
1,041–1,060 63
1,061–1,080 77
1,081–1,100 49
1,101–1,120 54
1,121–1,140 49
1,141–1,160 51
1,161–1,180 35
1,181–1,200 39
1,201–1,220 26
1,221–1,240 37
1,241–1,260 36
1,261–1,280 27
1,281–1,300 32
1,301–1,320 28
1,321–1,340 17
1,341–1,360 30
1,361–1,380 28
1,381–1,400 17
1,401–1,420 21
1,421–1,440 15
1,441–1,460 12
1,461–1,480 12
1,481–1,500 18
1,501–1,520 14
1,521–1,540 17
1,541–1,560 15
1,561–1,580 6
1,581–1,600 2
1,601–1,620 12
1,621–1,640 11
1,641–1,660 8
1,661–1,680 5
1,681–1,700 5
1,701–1,720 10
1,721–1,740 12
1,741–1,760 14
1,761–1,780 6
1,781–1,795 5
1,796+ 100
Download as CSV

Daniel F. McAuley 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 Daniel F. McAuley sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
250 500 750 1,000
Bar chart with 75 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 70–71 to 217+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 1,027. Most scientists, 1,027, have 82–83 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 92–93 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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: 399 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
70–71 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 92 D-Index — 45th percentile

45% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
70–71 226
72–73 391
74–75 574
76–77 730
78–79 891
80–81 972
82–83 1,027
84–85 1,003
86–87 960
88–89 970
90–91 922
92–93 839 92
94–95 808
96–97 779
98–99 668
100–101 611
102–103 630
104–105 513
106–107 541
108–109 445
110–111 429
112–113 399
114–115 393
116–117 318
118–119 302
120–121 287
122–123 255
124–125 256
126–127 252
128–129 230
130–131 179
132–133 168
134–135 163
136–137 159
138–139 134
140–141 134
142–143 118
144–145 109
146–147 106
148–149 74
150–151 79
152–153 80
154–155 87
156–157 57
158–159 74
160–161 69
162–163 60
164–165 53
166–167 39
168–169 42
170–171 32
172–173 39
174–175 40
176–177 28
178–179 19
180–181 23
182–183 31
184–185 18
186–187 20
188–189 22
190–191 13
192–193 21
194–195 12
196–197 12
198–199 14
200–201 15
202–203 13
204–205 10
206–207 8
208–209 4
210–211 12
212–213 11
214–215 10
216 4
217+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

Daniel F. McAuley is affiliated with Queen's University Belfast in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily focuses on the field of Medicine, with significant contributions in subfields such as Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Epidemiology, Emergency Medicine, and Infectious Diseases.

The scientist has published extensively in several key research areas, including Respiratory Support and Mechanisms, Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders, Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment, Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation, Neonatal Respiratory Health Research, COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies, and Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices.

Frequent collaboration has been noted with several co-authors, including Manu Shankar-Hari, Cecilia O'Kane, Alistair Nichol, Bronagh Blackwood, and Gavin D. Perkins. These partnerships have supported a range of research projects and publications.

Daniel F. McAuley's work has appeared regularly in notable publication venues. These include Critical Care, American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), JAMA, and Intensive Care Medicine.

Recent published papers illustrate areas of focus relevant to acute medical conditions and treatment interventions:

  • COVID-19: consider cytokine storm syndromes and immunosuppression (2020, The Lancet)
  • Interleukin-6 Receptor Antagonists in Critically Ill Patients with Covid-19 (2021, New England Journal of Medicine)
  • A minimal common outcome measure set for COVID-19 clinical research (2020, The Lancet Infectious Diseases)
  • Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19 (2020, JAMA)
  • Association Between Administration of IL-6 Antagonists and Mortality Among Patients Hospitalized for COVID-19 (2021, JAMA)

Best Publications

  • COVID-19: consider cytokine storm syndromes and immunosuppression

    Puja Mehta;Daniel F McAuley;Michael Brown;Emilie Sanchez

  • Epidemiology, Patterns of Care, and Mortality for Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Intensive Care Units in 50 Countries

    Giacomo Bellani;John G. Laffey;John G. Laffey;Tài Pham;Tài Pham;Eddy Fan;Eddy Fan

  • A minimal common outcome measure set for COVID-19 clinical research

    John C. Marshall;Srinivas Murthy;Janet Diaz;Neil Adhikari

  • An Official American Thoracic Society/European Society of Intensive Care Medicine/Society of Critical Care Medicine Clinical Practice Guideline: Mechanical Ventilation in Adult Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

    Eddy Fan;Lorenzo Del Sorbo;Ewan C. Goligher;Carol L. Hodgson

  • Genetic mechanisms of critical illness in Covid-19.

    E. Pairo-Castineira;E. Pairo-Castineira;S. Clohisey;L. Klaric;A. D. Bretherick

  • Referral to an Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Center and Mortality Among Patients With Severe 2009 Influenza A(H1N1)

    Moronke A. Noah;Giles J. Peek;Simon J. Finney;Mark J. Griffiths

  • Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

    Derek C. Angus;Lennie Derde;Farah Al-Beidh

  • Mesenchymal Stromal Cells Modulate Macrophages in Clinically Relevant Lung Injury Models by Extracellular Vesicle Mitochondrial Transfer

    Thomas J Morrison;Megan V Jackson;Erin K Cunningham;Adrien Kissenpfennig

  • Acute respiratory distress syndrome subphenotypes and differential response to simvastatin: secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial

    Carolyn S Calfee;Kevin L Delucchi;Pratik Sinha;Michael A Matthay

  • Timing of Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury.

    Starrt-Aki Investigators

  • The inflammatory response to extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO): a review of the pathophysiology.

    Jonathan E. Millar;Jonathon P. Fanning;Charles I. McDonald;Daniel F. McAuley

  • Physical, cognitive, and mental health impacts of COVID-19 after hospitalisation (PHOSP-COVID): a UK multicentre, prospective cohort study.

    Rachael A Evans;Hamish McAuley;Ewen M Harrison;Aarti Shikotra

  • Noninvasive Ventilation of Patients with Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome. Insights from the LUNG SAFE Study

    Giacomo Bellani;John G Laffey;Tài Pham;Fabiana Madotto

  • The statistical significance of randomized controlled trial results is frequently fragile: A case for a Fragility Index

    Michael Walsh;Michael Walsh;Sadeesh K. Srinathan;Daniel F. McAuley;Marko Mrkobrada

  • The beta-agonist lung injury trial (BALTI): a randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial.

    Gavin D. Perkins;Daniel F. McAuley;David R. Thickett;Fang Gao

  • Mitochondrial Transfer via Tunneling Nanotubes is an Important Mechanism by Which Mesenchymal Stem Cells Enhance Macrophage Phagocytosis in the In Vitro and In Vivo Models of ARDS.

    Megan V. Jackson;Thomas J. Morrison;Declan F. Doherty;Daniel F. McAuley

  • Simvastatin in the Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

    Daniel F. McAuley;John G. Laffey;John G. Laffey;Cecilia M. O'Kane;Gavin D. Perkins;Gavin D. Perkins

  • Guidelines on the management of acute respiratory distress syndrome

    Mark J D Griffiths;Danny Francis McAuley;Gavin D Perkins;Nicholas Barrett

  • Effect of intravenous haloperidol on the duration of delirium and coma in critically ill patients (Hope-ICU): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

    Valerie J Page;Valerie J Page;E Wesley Ely;Simon Gates;Xiao Bei Zhao

  • Genetic mechanisms of critical illness in Covid-19

    Erola Pairo-Castineira;Sara Clohisey;Lucija Klaric;Andrew Bretherick;Andrew Bretherick

Frequent Co-Authors

Gavin D. Perkins
Gavin D. Perkins University of Warwick
Michael A. Matthay
Michael A. Matthay University of California, San Francisco
John G. Laffey
John G. Laffey University of Galway
Eddy Fan
Eddy Fan University of Toronto
Graham Dunn
Graham Dunn University of Manchester
Mike Clarke
Mike Clarke Queen's University Belfast
Carolyn S. Calfee
Carolyn S. Calfee University of California, San Francisco
Clifford C. Taggart
Clifford C. Taggart Queen's University Belfast
Antonio Pesenti
Antonio Pesenti University of Milan
Adrien Kissenpfennig
Adrien Kissenpfennig Queen's University Belfast

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

Exploring alternative career pathways in medicine and healthcare opens up a world of opportunities beyond becoming a physician. Many students choose fields that support patient care, administration, or the healthcare system at large. For those interested in the operational side of healthcare, medical billing and coding schools with financial aid offer flexible online programs, making it easier to enter this high-demand profession.

Nursing remains a very popular option, and you can discover absn programs that don't require teas, simplifying the admissions process for those with a non-nursing degree. If you're aiming for a leadership role, consider a healthcare administration accelerated degree online, which fast-tracks you into management positions in hospitals and clinics.

Registered nurses seeking career advancement can also explore bridge programs such as the asn to np pathways, designed to help you become a nurse practitioner more efficiently. These flexible degree options provide diverse routes to impactful healthcare careers.

Best Scientists Citing Daniel F. McAuley

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles