World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
118
Citations
58786
World Ranking
4024
National Ranking
2203

Neuroscience

D-Index
118
Citations
58586
World Ranking
404
National Ranking
239

David C. Glahn 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 David C. Glahn 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: 482 publications — 94th percentile

94% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

David C. Glahn 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 David C. Glahn 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: 118 D-Index — 96th percentile

96% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

David C. Glahn is affiliated with Boston Children's Hospital in the United States. Their research spans multiple fields within the biological and medical sciences, with a focus on genetics, neuroimaging, and psychiatry. The main fields of study in their work include Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, and Medicine.

The subfields of study that characterize their research include Genetics, Cognitive Neuroscience, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging, Psychiatry and Mental Health, and Molecular Biology. Their work addresses a range of scientific topics such as Functional Brain Connectivity Studies, Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications, Genomic Variations and Chromosomal Abnormalities, Genetic Associations and Epidemiology, Genomics and Rare Diseases, Schizophrenia Research and Treatment, and Genetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders.

David C. Glahn has authored numerous papers published in frequent venues such as bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), Biological Psychiatry, Human Brain Mapping, European Neuropsychopharmacology, and Molecular Psychiatry. Some of their recent papers include:

  • Brain charts for the human lifespan, 2022, Nature
  • A genomic mutational constraint map using variation in 76,156 human genomes, 2023, Nature
  • Rare coding variants in ten genes confer substantial risk for schizophrenia, 2022, Nature
  • Genetic diversity fuels gene discovery for tobacco and alcohol use, 2022, Nature
  • Cortical thickness across the lifespan: Data from 17,075 healthy individuals aged 3-90 years, 2021, Human Brain Mapping

The scientist collaborates frequently with several co-authors, including:

  • Laura Almasy
  • John Blangero
  • Sébastien Jacquemont
  • Paul M. Thompson
  • Amanda Rodrigue

Best Publications

  • Correspondence of the brain's functional architecture during activation and rest.

    Stephen M. Smith;Peter T. Fox;Karla L. Miller;David C. Glahn

  • Meta-analytic evidence for a superordinate cognitive control network subserving diverse executive functions

    Tara A. Niendam;Angela R. Laird;Kimberly L. Ray;Y. Monica Dean

  • Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence

    Jeanne E Savage;Philip R Jansen;Philip R Jansen;Sven Stringer;Kyoko Watanabe

  • Meta-analysis of 41 Functional Neuroimaging Studies of Executive Function in Schizophrenia

    Michael J. Minzenberg;Angela R. Laird;Sarah Thelen;Cameron S. Carter

  • Cortical Thickness or Grey Matter Volume? The Importance of Selecting the Phenotype for Imaging Genetics Studies

    Anderson M. Winkler;Peter V. Kochunov;John Blangero;Laura Almasy

  • Subcortical brain volume abnormalities in 2028 individuals with schizophrenia and 2540 healthy controls via the ENIGMA consortium

    T. G M van Erp;D. P. Hibar;J. M. Rasmussen;D. C. Glahn

  • Behavioral interpretations of intrinsic connectivity networks

    Angela R. Laird;P. Mickle Fox;Simon B. Eickhoff;Jessica A. Turner

  • ALE meta-analysis: Controlling the false discovery rate and performing statistical contrasts

    Angela R. Laird;P. Mickle Fox;Cathy J. Price;David C. Glahn

  • Common genetic variants influence human subcortical brain structures.

    Derrek P. Hibar;Jason L. Stein;Jason L. Stein;Miguel E. Renteria;Alejandro Arias-Vasquez

  • The genetic architecture of the human cerebral cortex

    Katrina L. Grasby;Neda Jahanshad;Jodie N. Painter;Lucía Colodro-Conde

  • The ENIGMA Consortium: large-scale collaborative analyses of neuroimaging and genetic data

    Paul M. Thompson;Jason L. Stein;Sarah E. Medland;Derrek P. Hibar

  • Cortical abnormalities in bipolar disorder : An MRI analysis of 6503 individuals from the ENIGMA Bipolar Disorder Working Group

    D P Hibar;L T Westlye;L T Westlye;N T Doan;N T Doan;N Jahanshad

  • Study of 300,486 individuals identifies 148 independent genetic loci influencing general cognitive function

    Gail Davies;Max Lam;Sarah E. Harris;Joey W. Trampush

  • Beyond hypofrontality: A quantitative meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies of working memory in schizophrenia

    David C. Glahn;J. Daniel Ragland;Adir Abramoff;Jennifer Barrett

  • Meta-analysis of gray matter anomalies in schizophrenia: application of anatomic likelihood estimation and network analysis.

    David C. Glahn;Angela R. Laird;Ian Ellison-Wright;Sarah M. Thelen

  • On testing for spatial correspondence between maps of human brain structure and function.

    Aaron F. Alexander-Bloch;Haochang Shou;Siyuan Liu;Theodore D. Satterthwaite

  • Identification of common variants associated with human hippocampal and intracranial volumes

    Jason L Stein;Sarah E Medland;Sarah E Medland;Alejandro Arias Vasquez;Alejandro Arias Vasquez;Derrek P Hibar

  • The anatomy of first-episode and chronic schizophrenia: an anatomical likelihood estimation meta-analysis.

    M.R.C.P. Ian Ellison-Wright;David C. Glahn;Angela R. Laird;B.S. Sarah M. Thelen

  • Widespread white matter microstructural differences in schizophrenia across 4322 individuals : results from the ENIGMA Schizophrenia DTI Working Group

    S. Kelly;S. Kelly;N. Jahanshad;A. Zalesky;P. Kochunov

  • Investigating the Functional Heterogeneity of the Default Mode Network Using Coordinate-Based Meta-Analytic Modeling

    Angela R. Laird;Simon B. Eickhoff;Karl Li;Donald A. Robin

  • ENIGMA and global neuroscience: A decade of large-scale studies of the brain in health and disease across more than 40 countries

    Paul M Thompson;Neda Jahanshad;Christopher R K Ching;Lauren E Salminen

  • Erratum: Subcortical brain volume abnormalities in 2028 individuals with schizophrenia and 2540 healthy controls via the ENIGMA consortium (Molecular Psychiatry (2015) DOI:10.1038/mp.2015.63)

    T. G.M. Van Erp;D. P. Hibar;J. M. Rasmussen;D. C. Glahn

Frequent Co-Authors

John Blangero
John Blangero The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley
Peter T. Fox
Peter T. Fox The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
Paul M. Thompson
Paul M. Thompson University of Southern California
Ole A. Andreassen
Ole A. Andreassen Oslo University Hospital
Anderson M. Winkler
Anderson M. Winkler National Institutes of Health
Neda Jahanshad
Neda Jahanshad University of Southern California
Gary Donohoe
Gary Donohoe University of Galway
Emma Sprooten
Emma Sprooten Radboud University
Srdjan Djurovic
Srdjan Djurovic Oslo University Hospital
Laura Almasy
Laura Almasy University of Pennsylvania

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 neuroscience opens the door to a variety of online degree options and career paths in related fields like psychology and social work. If you’re looking to get started quickly, a bachelors in psychology online offers foundational knowledge and flexibility for working students.

For those interested in community impact and counseling, you’ll find many masters in social work online that are accessible and focus on real-world skills. Those pursuing advanced practice or clinical psychology careers can consider the psyd psychology online programs, which provide practical, doctoral-level training for future psychologists.

Additionally, if you’re looking to enter the marriage and family therapy profession quickly, there are accelerated mft programs online that shorten the path to licensure. Each of these online pathways supports different interests—clinical care, research, or social support—giving neuroscience students more ways to shape their careers and make an impact.

Best Scientists Citing David C. Glahn

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles