World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Award Badge
Best Scientists
2025
Award Badge
Medicine
UK
2023

D-Index & Metrics

Best Scientists

D-Index
296
Citations
1247315
World Ranking
14
National Ranking
1

Medicine

D-Index
288
Citations
1265244
World Ranking
12
National Ranking
1

Douglas G. Altman 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 Douglas G. Altman 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: 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 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 996 publications — 94th percentile

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

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

Douglas G. Altman 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 Douglas G. Altman 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: 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 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 288 D-Index — 100th percentile

100% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2025 - Research.com Best Scientists Award
  • 2023 - Research.com Medicine in United Kingdom Leader Award
  • 2022 - Research.com Medicine in United Kingdom Leader Award
  • 1997 - Bradford Hill Medal, Royal Statistical Society (UK)
  • Fellow of The Academy of Medical Sciences, United Kingdom
  • Lifetime achievement award, British Medical Journal (BMJ)
  • Fellow of The Academy of Medical Sciences, United Kingdom
  • Lifetime achievement award, British Medical Journal (BMJ)
  • Fellow of The Academy of Medical Sciences, United Kingdom
  • Lifetime achievement award, British Medical Journal (BMJ)
  • Fellow of The Academy of Medical Sciences, United Kingdom
  • Lifetime achievement award, British Medical Journal (BMJ)

Overview

Douglas G. Altman was affiliated with the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom. Their research broadly focused on decision sciences, with particular emphasis on statistical methods and applications in healthcare and clinical research. Altman's work covered several subfields including statistics, probability and uncertainty, public health, environmental and occupational health, economics and econometrics, and general health professions.

Throughout their career, Altman contributed notably to topics such as meta-analysis and systematic reviews, health systems, economic evaluations and quality of life, ethics in clinical research, clinical practice guidelines implementation, reliability and agreement in measurement, healthcare cost and quality, and statistical methods in clinical trials.

Altman published research in various journals and platforms, frequently contributing to:

  • UNC Libraries
  • Вопросы современной педиатрии
  • Digital Diagnostics
  • Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
  • British Journal of Sports Medicine

Some of the recent papers authored or co-authored by Altman include:

  • "A CHecklist for statistical Assessment of Medical Papers (the CHAMP statement): explanation and elaboration" (2021), British Journal of Sports Medicine
  • "The Adaptive designs CONSORT Extension (ACE) statement: a checklist with explanation and elaboration guideline for reporting randomised trials that use an adaptive design" (2020), BMJ
  • "Bland-Altman methods for comparing methods of measurement and response to criticisms" (2020), Global Epidemiology
  • "Reporting guidelines of health research studies are frequently used inappropriately" (2020), Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
  • "CHecklist for statistical Assessment of Medical Papers: the CHAMP statement" (2021), British Journal of Sports Medicine

Frequent co-authors included:

  • David Moher
  • Kenneth F. Schulz
  • Matthias Egger
  • Cynthia D. Mulrow
  • Gary S. Collins

Altman received several awards over their career. These included the Bradford Hill Medal from the Royal Statistical Society (UK) in 1997, a Lifetime Achievement Award from the British Medical Journal, and fellowship in The Academy of Medical Sciences in the United Kingdom.

Best Publications

  • Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement

    David Moher;David Moher;Alessandro Liberati;Jennifer Tetzlaff;Douglas G. Altman

  • Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

    David Moher;David Moher;Alessandro Liberati;Jennifer Tetzlaff;Douglas G. Altman

  • The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration

    Alessandro Liberati;Douglas G. Altman;Jennifer Tetzlaff;Cynthia Mulrow

  • Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

    J M Bland;J M Bland;D G Altman;D G Altman

  • Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses

    Julian P T Higgins;Simon G Thompson;Jonathan J Deeks;Douglas G Altman

  • The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

    E von Elm;D G Altman;M Egger;M Egger;S J Pocock

  • Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies

    Julian Pt Higgins;Douglas G Altman

  • The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

    Julian P T Higgins;Douglas G Altman;Peter C Gøtzsche;Peter Jüni

  • [The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies].

    Erik von Elm;Douglas G. Altman;Matthias Egger;Matthias Egger;Stuart J. Pocock

  • Practical statistics for medical research

    Douglas G. Altman

  • The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration

    Alessandro Liberati;Douglas G Altman;Jennifer Tetzlaff;Cynthia Mulrow

  • Practical Statistics for Medical Research.

    S. D. Walter;D. G. Altman

  • CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

    K F Schulz;D G Altman;D Moher

  • ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions.

    Jonathan A. C. Sterne;Miguel A Hernan;Barnaby C Reeves;Jelena Savovic;Jelena Savovic

  • CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.

    Kenneth F Schulz;Douglas G Altman;David Moher;David Moher

  • Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis Or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD Statement.

    G S Collins;J B Reitsma;D G Altman;K G M Moons

  • Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement

    D Moher;A Liberati;J Tetzlaff;D G Altman

  • Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement

    J. Martin Bland;J. Martin Bland;Douglas G. Altman;Douglas G. Altman

  • Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies

    Erik von Elm;Douglas G Altman;Matthias Egger;Stuart J Pocock

  • METHODS OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AND META-ANALYSIS Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement

    David Moher;Alessandro Liberati;Jennifer Tetzlaff;Douglas G. Altman

Frequent Co-Authors

David Moher
David Moher Ottawa Hospital
Kenneth F. Schulz
Kenneth F. Schulz University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Gary S. Collins
Gary S. Collins University of Oxford
Matthias Egger
Matthias Egger University of Bern
Sally Hopewell
Sally Hopewell University of Oxford
Mike Clarke
Mike Clarke Queen's University Belfast
Karel G.M. Moons
Karel G.M. Moons Utrecht University
Isabelle Boutron
Isabelle Boutron Université Paris Cité
Jonathan J Deeks
Jonathan J Deeks University of Birmingham

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 considering a career in medicine but seeking alternative or advanced pathways, online degrees in nursing and related fields offer flexible and affordable options. Many students opt for programs that allow them to balance work, study, and personal life—a major advantage of online education.

There are several pathways to enter or advance within the healthcare sector. For instance, those aiming to become nurse practitioners often look for the most affordable online nurse practitioner programs to manage costs while gaining specialized expertise. Likewise, registered nurses hoping to earn a bachelor’s degree can explore the cheapest online rn to bsn programs, which can open doors to leadership positions and higher pay.

Aspiring nurses or those advancing their qualifications may consider the affordable nursing programs tailored for entry-level and advanced students. For those interested in leadership roles or advanced practice, pursuing the cheapest dnp programs provides a cost-effective route to a terminal degree in nursing.

Exploring these accredited and budget-conscious online programs can be a practical step for anyone seeking a meaningful and versatile career in healthcare.

Best Scientists Citing Douglas G. Altman