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 74 19321 18139 1740 1667 259 24199

Elaine M. Hay publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Elaine M. Hay between 1988 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Elaine M. Hay published across 38 years, from 1988 to 2025, averaging 7.2 papers a year. Output peaked at 23 publications in 2015. 5 of the 273 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1988 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 23. Peak 23 publications in 2015. 1988: 1 publication 1989: 2 publications 1990: 3 publications 1991: 4 publications 1992: 6 publications 1993: 8 publications 1994: 7 publications 1995: 5 publications 1996: 1 publication 1997: 1 publication 1998: 1 publication 1999: 4 publications 2000: 2 publications 2001: 3 publications 2002: 4 publications 2003: 4 publications 2004: 8 publications 2005: 8 publications 2006: 13 publications 2007: 9 publications 2008: 13 publications 2009: 11 publications 2010: 17 publications 2011: 13 publications 2012: 9 publications 2013: 8 publications 2014: 14 publications 2015: 23 publications 2016: 16 publications 2017: 7 publications 2018: 15 publications 2019: 6 publications 2020: 11 publications 2021: 4 publications 2022: 4 publications 2023: 3 publications 2024: 2 publications 2025: 3 publications
1988 2025

273 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Elaine M. Hay: publications per year, 1988 to 2025
Year Publications
1988 1
1989 2
1990 3
1991 4
1992 6
1993 8
1994 7
1995 5
1996 1
1997 1
1998 1
1999 4
2000 2
2001 3
2002 4
2003 4
2004 8
2005 8
2006 13
2007 9
2008 13
2009 11
2010 17
2011 13
2012 9
2013 8
2014 14
2015 23
2016 16
2017 7
2018 15
2019 6
2020 11
2021 4
2022 4
2023 3
2024 2
2025 3
Total 273
Download as CSV

Elaine M. Hay 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 Elaine M. Hay 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, 241–260 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: 259 publications — 9th percentile

9% 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
241–260 545 259
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
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

Elaine M. Hay 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 Elaine M. Hay 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, 74–75 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: 74 D-Index — 4th percentile

4% 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 74
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
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

Elaine M. Hay is affiliated with Keele University in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily revolves around the field of Medicine, with a significant focus on musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation. This area accounts for a substantial portion of their work, alongside contributions to health systems, economic evaluations, quality of life, clinical practice guidelines implementation, peripheral nerve disorders, spine and intervertebral disc pathology, shoulder injury and treatment, and orthopedic surgery and rehabilitation.

Their recent publication record includes several articles in reputable journals. Notable papers include:

  • Stratified primary care versus non-stratified care for musculoskeletal pain: findings from the STarT MSK feasibility and pilot cluster randomized controlled trial, 2020, BMC Family Practice
  • Refinement and validation of a tool for stratifying patients with musculoskeletal pain, 2021, European Journal of Pain
  • Risk-based stratified primary care for common musculoskeletal pain presentations (STarT MSK): a cluster-randomised, controlled trial, 2022, The Lancet Rheumatology
  • Optimising outcomes of exercise and corticosteroid injection in patients with subacromial pain (impingement) syndrome: a factorial randomised trial, 2020, British Journal of Sports Medicine
  • Stratified care versus usual care for management of patients presenting with sciatica in primary care (SCOPiC): a randomised controlled trial, 2020, The Lancet Rheumatology

They have strong collaborative ties with multiple coauthors, frequently working with:

  • Nadine E. Foster
  • Daniëlle van der Windt
  • Jonathan Hill
  • Sue Jowett
  • Martyn Lewis

Elaine M. Hay has published extensively in several journals and venues, with frequent contributions to:

  • Lara D. Veeken
  • The Lancet Rheumatology
  • BMJ Open
  • BMC Family Practice
  • European Journal of Pain

Their work touches multiple subfields within medicine, including pharmacology, public health, environmental and occupational health, economics and econometrics, surgery, and rehabilitation. This multidisciplinary approach aligns with their engagement in varied but interrelated topics concerning musculoskeletal conditions and their management in clinical practice.

Best Publications

  • The development and initial validation of the Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology damage index for systemic lupus erythematosus.

    Dafna Gladman;Ellen Ginzler;Charles Goldsmith;Paul Fortin

  • The American College of Rheumatology nomenclature and case definitions for neuropsychiatric lupus syndromes

    Matthew H. Liang;Michael Corzillius;Sang Cheol Bae;Robert A. Lew

  • Preliminary criteria for the classification of Sjögren's syndrome. Results of a prospective concerted action supported by the European Community.

    Claudio Vitali;Stefano Bombardieri;Haralampos M. Moutsopoulos;Genesio Balestrieri

  • Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial

    Jonathan C Hill;David G T Whitehurst;David G T Whitehurst;David G T Whitehurst;Martyn Lewis;Stirling Bryan;Stirling Bryan

  • A primary care back pain screening tool: identifying patient subgroups for initial treatment.

    Jonathan C. Hill;Kate M. Dunn;Martyn Lewis;Ricky Mullis

  • The BILAG index: a reliable and valid instrument for measuring clinical disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus.

    E.M. Hay;P.A. Bacon;C. Gordon;D.A. Isenberg

  • Evidence-based recommendations for the role of exercise in the management of osteoarthritis of the hip or knee—the MOVE consensus

    E Roddy;W Zhang;M Doherty;N K Arden

  • Shoulder pain: diagnosis and management in primary care

    Caroline Mitchell;Ade Adebajo;Elaine Hay;Andrew Carr

  • Corticosteroid injections for lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review.

    Nynke Smidt;Willem J.J. Assendelft;Daniëlle A.W.M van der Windt;Elaine M. Hay

  • Pragmatic randomised controlled trial of local corticosteroid injection and naproxen for treatment of lateral epicondylitis of elbow in primary care

    Elaine M Hay;Susan M Paterson;Martyn Lewis;Gillian Hosie

  • Sjögren's syndrome: a community-based study of prevalence and impact.

    E Thomas;E M Hay;A Hajeer;A J Silman

  • Patients' preferences within randomised trials: systematic review and patient level meta-analysis

    Simon J Adamson;J Martin Bland;Elaine M Hay;Ruth E Johnson

  • Illness perceptions of low back pain patients in primary care: what are they, do they change and are they associated with outcome?

    Nadine E. Foster;Annette Bishop;Elaine Thomas;Chris Main

  • How does the self-reported clinical management of patients with low back pain relate to the attitudes and beliefs of health care practitioners? A survey of UK general practitioners and physiotherapists

    Annette Bishop;Nadine E. Foster;Elaine Thomas;Elaine M. Hay

  • Prevalence of radiographic osteoarthritis—it all depends on your point of view

    R. C. Duncan;E. M. Hay;J. Saklatvala;P. R. Croft

  • Acupuncture as an adjunct to exercise based physiotherapy for osteoarthritis of the knee: randomised controlled trial

    Nadine E Foster;Elaine Thomas;Panos Barlas;Jonathan C Hill

  • Weak association between subjective symptoms or and objective testing for dry eyes and dry mouth: results from a population based study.

    Elaine M Hay;E Thomas;B Pal;Ali Hajeer

  • Effect of Stratified Care for Low Back Pain in Family Practice (IMPaCT Back): A Prospective Population-Based Sequential Comparison

    Nadine E. Foster;Ricky Mullis;Jonathan C. Hill;Martyn Lewis

  • A comparison of four shoulder-specific questionnaires in primary care

    A Paul;M Lewis;M F Shadforth;P R Croft

  • Subgrouping low back pain: A comparison of the STarT Back Tool with the Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire

    Jonathan C. Hill;Kate M. Dunn;Chris J. Main;Elaine M. Hay

Frequent Co-Authors

Nadine E. Foster
Nadine E. Foster University of Queensland
Elaine Thomas
Elaine Thomas Keele University
Peter Croft
Peter Croft Keele University
Chris J. Main
Chris J. Main Keele University
David A. Isenberg
David A. Isenberg University College London
Alan J. Silman
Alan J. Silman University of Oxford
Lex M. Bouter
Lex M. Bouter Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Bart W. Koes
Bart W. Koes Erasmus University Rotterdam
Lucy Yardley
Lucy Yardley University of Bristol

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 medicine as a career can open the door to a wide range of rewarding pathways, many of which can now be studied online. For those interested in advanced patient care, becoming a Family Nurse Practitioner (FNP) is a popular choice. There are now cheapest online fnp programs that make this specialization more accessible and affordable.

If you are considering entering the nursing field or advancing your qualifications, you may be wondering how much is online nursing school. Exploring cost-effective options for nursing degrees online can significantly reduce financial barriers to your education.

For those looking to pursue research or leadership roles, an online nursing doctorate offers the opportunity to deepen your expertise from anywhere in the world.

Already an RN and looking to upgrade your credentials? There are cheapest rn to bsn online programs designed to help registered nurses advance their careers while balancing work and life commitments.

Best Scientists Citing Elaine M. Hay

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles