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
Social Sciences and Humanities 48 3213 2955 547 500 221 7194

Donna Rowen publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Donna Rowen between 2004 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Donna Rowen published across 22 years, from 2004 to 2025, averaging 12.1 papers a year. Output peaked at 46 publications in 2014. 29 of the 267 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30 40
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2004 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 46. Peak 46 publications in 2014. 2004: 1 publication 2005: 1 publication 2006: 0 publications 2007: 3 publications 2008: 0 publications 2009: 4 publications 2010: 10 publications 2011: 11 publications 2012: 22 publications 2013: 18 publications 2014: 46 publications 2015: 6 publications 2016: 11 publications 2017: 14 publications 2018: 12 publications 2019: 11 publications 2020: 14 publications 2021: 17 publications 2022: 24 publications 2023: 13 publications 2024: 15 publications 2025: 14 publications
2004 2025

267 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Donna Rowen: publications per year, 2004 to 2025
Year Publications
2004 1
2005 1
2006 0
2007 3
2008 0
2009 4
2010 10
2011 11
2012 22
2013 18
2014 46
2015 6
2016 11
2017 14
2018 12
2019 11
2020 14
2021 17
2022 24
2023 13
2024 15
2025 14
Total 267
Download as CSV

Donna Rowen publication distribution in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Donna Rowen sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400
Bar chart with 54 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 44–53 to 570+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 474. Most scientists, 474, have 114–123 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 570 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 214–223 publications, is where this scientist sits. 44–53 publications: 28 scientists 54–63 publications: 61 scientists 64–73 publications: 161 scientists 74–83 publications: 225 scientists 84–93 publications: 301 scientists 94–103 publications: 390 scientists 104–113 publications: 406 scientists 114–123 publications: 474 scientists 124–133 publications: 453 scientists 134–143 publications: 434 scientists 144–153 publications: 407 scientists 154–163 publications: 411 scientists 164–173 publications: 391 scientists 174–183 publications: 313 scientists 184–193 publications: 319 scientists 194–203 publications: 304 scientists 204–213 publications: 285 scientists 214–223 publications: 246 scientists 224–233 publications: 213 scientists 234–243 publications: 170 scientists 244–253 publications: 167 scientists 254–263 publications: 162 scientists 264–273 publications: 138 scientists 274–283 publications: 138 scientists 284–293 publications: 113 scientists 294–303 publications: 106 scientists 304–313 publications: 95 scientists 314–323 publications: 101 scientists 324–333 publications: 81 scientists 334–343 publications: 69 scientists 344–353 publications: 56 scientists 354–363 publications: 36 scientists 364–373 publications: 42 scientists 374–383 publications: 41 scientists 384–393 publications: 44 scientists 394–403 publications: 27 scientists 404–413 publications: 30 scientists 414–423 publications: 20 scientists 424–433 publications: 29 scientists 434–443 publications: 29 scientists 444–453 publications: 25 scientists 454–463 publications: 19 scientists 464–473 publications: 21 scientists 474–483 publications: 11 scientists 484–493 publications: 17 scientists 494–503 publications: 7 scientists 504–513 publications: 6 scientists 514–523 publications: 12 scientists 524–533 publications: 10 scientists 534–543 publications: 7 scientists 544–553 publications: 6 scientists 554–563 publications: 12 scientists 564–569 publications: 8 scientists 570+ publications: 100 scientists
44–53 publications 570+

This scientist: 221 publications — 72nd percentile

72% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 570 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 7,777 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
44–53 28
54–63 61
64–73 161
74–83 225
84–93 301
94–103 390
104–113 406
114–123 474
124–133 453
134–143 434
144–153 407
154–163 411
164–173 391
174–183 313
184–193 319
194–203 304
204–213 285
214–223 246 221
224–233 213
234–243 170
244–253 167
254–263 162
264–273 138
274–283 138
284–293 113
294–303 106
304–313 95
314–323 101
324–333 81
334–343 69
344–353 56
354–363 36
364–373 42
374–383 41
384–393 44
394–403 27
404–413 30
414–423 20
424–433 29
434–443 29
444–453 25
454–463 19
464–473 21
474–483 11
484–493 17
494–503 7
504–513 6
514–523 12
524–533 10
534–543 7
544–553 6
554–563 12
564–569 8
570+ 100
Download as CSV

Donna Rowen D-index placement in Social Sciences and Humanities in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Donna Rowen sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300
Bar chart with 71 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30 to 100+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 313. Most scientists, 313, have 42 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 100 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 48 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 30 D-Index: 177 scientists 31 D-Index: 210 scientists 32 D-Index: 222 scientists 33 D-Index: 188 scientists 34 D-Index: 181 scientists 35 D-Index: 243 scientists 36 D-Index: 261 scientists 37 D-Index: 272 scientists 38 D-Index: 278 scientists 39 D-Index: 300 scientists 40 D-Index: 297 scientists 41 D-Index: 308 scientists 42 D-Index: 313 scientists 43 D-Index: 300 scientists 44 D-Index: 269 scientists 45 D-Index: 260 scientists 46 D-Index: 228 scientists 47 D-Index: 251 scientists 48 D-Index: 203 scientists 49 D-Index: 186 scientists 50 D-Index: 187 scientists 51 D-Index: 166 scientists 52 D-Index: 138 scientists 53 D-Index: 141 scientists 54 D-Index: 131 scientists 55 D-Index: 137 scientists 56 D-Index: 109 scientists 57 D-Index: 129 scientists 58 D-Index: 95 scientists 59 D-Index: 105 scientists 60 D-Index: 106 scientists 61 D-Index: 86 scientists 62 D-Index: 94 scientists 63 D-Index: 77 scientists 64 D-Index: 79 scientists 65 D-Index: 59 scientists 66 D-Index: 68 scientists 67 D-Index: 51 scientists 68 D-Index: 49 scientists 69 D-Index: 40 scientists 70 D-Index: 43 scientists 71 D-Index: 40 scientists 72 D-Index: 50 scientists 73 D-Index: 46 scientists 74 D-Index: 43 scientists 75 D-Index: 45 scientists 76 D-Index: 45 scientists 77 D-Index: 30 scientists 78 D-Index: 25 scientists 79 D-Index: 31 scientists 80 D-Index: 29 scientists 81 D-Index: 18 scientists 82 D-Index: 21 scientists 83 D-Index: 26 scientists 84 D-Index: 15 scientists 85 D-Index: 15 scientists 86 D-Index: 19 scientists 87 D-Index: 19 scientists 88 D-Index: 12 scientists 89 D-Index: 7 scientists 90 D-Index: 19 scientists 91 D-Index: 20 scientists 92 D-Index: 13 scientists 93 D-Index: 9 scientists 94 D-Index: 13 scientists 95 D-Index: 8 scientists 96 D-Index: 7 scientists 97 D-Index: 6 scientists 98 D-Index: 6 scientists 99 D-Index: 6 scientists 100+ D-Index: 97 scientists
30 D-Index 100+

This scientist: 48 D-Index — 61st percentile

61% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 100 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Social Sciences and Humanities scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 7,777 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30 177
31 210
32 222
33 188
34 181
35 243
36 261
37 272
38 278
39 300
40 297
41 308
42 313
43 300
44 269
45 260
46 228
47 251
48 203 48
49 186
50 187
51 166
52 138
53 141
54 131
55 137
56 109
57 129
58 95
59 105
60 106
61 86
62 94
63 77
64 79
65 59
66 68
67 51
68 49
69 40
70 43
71 40
72 50
73 46
74 43
75 45
76 45
77 30
78 25
79 31
80 29
81 18
82 21
83 26
84 15
85 15
86 19
87 19
88 12
89 7
90 19
91 20
92 13
93 9
94 13
95 8
96 7
97 6
98 6
99 6
100+ 97
Download as CSV

Overview

Donna Rowen is affiliated with the University of Sheffield in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily spans the fields of Economics, Econometrics and Finance, along with Medicine, with a focus on subfields such as Economics and Econometrics, General Health Professions, Ophthalmology, Epidemiology, and Sociology and Political Science.

The research topics covered in their work include:

  • Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Economic and Environmental Valuation
  • Global Health Care Issues
  • Healthcare Policy and Management
  • Delphi Technique in Research
  • Retinal Diseases and Treatments
  • Retinal Imaging and Analysis

Donna Rowen has published extensively in several key venues, notably:

  • Value in Health
  • PharmacoEconomics
  • Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
  • Social Science & Medicine
  • Quality of Life Research

Their recent papers include:

  • "Review of Valuation Methods of Preference-Based Measures of Health for Economic Evaluation in Child and Adolescent Populations: Where are We Now and Where are We Going?", 2020, PharmacoEconomics
  • "A Review of the Psychometric Performance of Selected Child and Adolescent Preference-Based Measures Used to Produce Utilities for Child and Adolescent Health", 2020, Value in Health

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Donna Rowen include:

  • John Brazier
  • Clara Mukuria
  • Jill Carlton
  • Philip A. Powell
  • Jan Henrik Terheyden

Best Publications

  • A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures

    John E. Brazier;Yaling Yang;Aki Tsuchiya;Donna Louise Rowen

  • Use of generic and condition-specific measures of health-related quality of life in NICE decision-making: a systematic review, statistical modelling and survey

    L Longworth;Y Yang;T Young;B Mulhern

  • Mapping to Obtain EQ-5D Utility Values for Use in NICE Health Technology Assessments

    Louise Longworth;Donna Rowen

  • Mapping SF-36 onto the EQ-5D index: how reliable is the relationship?

    Donna Rowen;John A. Brazier;Jennifer Roberts

  • Deriving a preference-based measure for cancer using the EORTC QLQ-C30.

    Donna Rowen;John Brazier;Tracey Young;Sabine Gaugris

  • Developing and testing methods for deriving preference-based measures of health from condition-specific measures (and other patient-based measures of outcome).

    J E Brazier;D Rowen;I Mavranezouli;A Tsuchiya

  • International Regulations and Recommendations for Utility Data for Health Technology Assessment

    Donna Rowen;Ismail Azzabi Zouraq;Helene Chevrou-Severac;Ben van Hout

  • Development of DEMQOL-U and DEMQOL-PROXY-U: generation of preference-based indices from DEMQOL and DEMQOL-PROXY for use in economic evaluation

    B Mulhern;D Rowen;J Brazier;S Smith

  • The EQ Health and Wellbeing: Overview of the Development of a Measure of Health and Wellbeing and Key Results.

    Unknown

  • Proceedings of Patient Reported Outcome Measure’s (PROMs) Conference Sheffield 2016: advances in patient reported outcomes research

    Tim Croudace;John Brazier;Nils Gutacker;Andrew Street

  • QLU-C10D: a health state classification system for a multi-attribute utility measure based on the EORTC QLQ-C30.

    Madeleine King;Daniel Costa;N. Aaronson;J. Brazier

  • A Review of Generic Preference-Based Measures for Use in Cost-Effectiveness Models

    John Brazier;Roberta Ara;Donna Rowen;Helene Chevrou-Severac

  • An Exploratory Study to Test the Impact on Three “Bolt-On” Items to the EQ-5D

    Yaling Yang;Donna Rowen;John A. Brazier;Aki Tsuchiya

  • A Comparison of Methods for Converting DCE Values onto the Full Health-Dead QALY Scale:

    Donna Rowen;John Brazier;Ben Van Hout

  • Australian utility weights for the EORTC QLU-C10D, a multi-attribute utility instrument derived from the cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire, EORTC QLQ-C30

    Madeleine T. King;Rosalie Viney;A. Simon Pickard;Donna Rowen

  • Using a discrete choice experiment to value the QLU-C10D: feasibility and sensitivity to presentation format

    R. Norman;R. Viney;N. K. Aaronson;J. E. Brazier

  • Estimating the SF-6D value set for a population-based sample of Brazilians.

    Luciane N. Cruz;Suzi A. Camey;Juliana F. Hoffmann;Donna Rowen

  • An Updated Systematic Review of Studies Mapping (or Cross-Walking) Measures of Health-Related Quality of Life to Generic Preference-Based Measures to Generate Utility Values.

    Clara Mukuria;Donna Rowen;Sue Harnan;Andrew Rawdin

  • Estimating Preference-Based Single Index Measures for Dementia Using DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy

    Donna Rowen;Brendan Mulhern;Sube Banerjee;Ben van Hout

  • The Role of Condition-Specific Preference-Based Measures in Health Technology Assessment

    Donna Rowen;John Brazier;Roberta Ara;Ismail Azzabi Zouraq

Frequent Co-Authors

John Brazier
John Brazier University of Sheffield
Brendan Mulhern
Brendan Mulhern University of Technology Sydney
Aki Tsuchiya
Aki Tsuchiya University of Sheffield
Nancy Devlin
Nancy Devlin University of Melbourne
John Cairns
John Cairns London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
Paul Dolan
Paul Dolan London School of Economics and Political Science
Martin Knapp
Martin Knapp London School of Economics and Political Science
Sube Banerjee
Sube Banerjee Plymouth University
Madeleine King
Madeleine King University of Sydney
Robert Howard
Robert Howard University College London

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 Social Sciences and Humanities opens various flexible online learning opportunities in the USA. Many students look for options that balance affordability, accreditation, and career advancement. For example, cheap online msw programs help students gain social work skills while minimizing financial strain. Those in a hurry might prefer an accelerated msw program online, which allows graduates to enter the workforce more quickly.

Beyond social work, career pathways such as behavioral analysis are growing in demand. Accredited online bcba programs provide training for those aspiring to become Board Certified Behavior Analysts. Psychology is another fast-growing field, and a fast psychology degree can be earned online for those eager to move ahead in a variety of professional roles.

These flexible, accredited online programs not only open doors to meaningful careers but also support diverse learners seeking affordable, time-efficient education in the social sciences and humanities.

Best Scientists Citing Donna Rowen

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles