World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
100
Citations
43902
World Ranking
8187
National Ranking
803

Frank Kee 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 Frank Kee 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: 611 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: 755 publications — 85th percentile

85% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Frank Kee 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 Frank Kee 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: 400 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: 100 D-Index — 60th percentile

60% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Frank Kee is affiliated with Queen's University Belfast in the United Kingdom. Their academic work primarily falls within the field of Medicine, with a particular focus on several key subfields including General Health Professions, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Health, and Infectious Diseases.

Throughout their career, Frank Kee has contributed to a variety of research topics. The main areas of their work cover Health disparities and outcomes, COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies, Urban Transport and Accessibility, Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life, Mobile Health and mHealth Applications, Obesity, Physical Activity, Diet, and Retinal Imaging and Analysis.

Frank Kee's frequently published research venues include bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), BMJ Open, SSRN Electronic Journal, BMJ, and the European Heart Journal. The extent of their contributions to these publications is notable, with the highest number of papers in bioRxiv (19) and BMJ Open (13).

The scientist has collaborated regularly with a number of co-authors, including Ruth F. Hunter, Bernadette McGuinness, Kari Kuulasmaa, Ian Young, and Veikko Salomaa. Each of these collaborators has co-authored over 29 papers with Frank Kee, indicating a consistent and extensive research partnership.

Among their recent publications are:

  • SCORE2 risk prediction algorithms: new models to estimate 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease in Europe (2021, European Heart Journal)
  • Global Effect of Modifiable Risk Factors on Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality (2023, New England Journal of Medicine)
  • Living risk prediction algorithm (QCOVID) for risk of hospital admission and mortality from coronavirus 19 in adults: national derivation and validation cohort study (2020, BMJ)
  • Adapting interventions to new contexts-the ADAPT guidance (2021, BMJ)
  • Association Between Depressive Symptoms and Incident Cardiovascular Diseases (2020, JAMA)

Best Publications

  • Defining the role of common variation in the genomic and biological architecture of adult human height

    Andrew R. Wood;Tonu Esko;Jian Yang;Sailaja Vedantam

  • Large-scale association analysis identifies new risk loci for coronary artery disease

    Panos Deloukas;Stavroula Kanoni;Christina Willenborg;Martin Farrall

  • Human papillomavirus and oral cancer: the International Agency for Research on Cancer multicenter study.

    Rolando Herrero;Xavier Castellsagué;Michael Pawlita;Jolanta Lissowska

  • SCORE2 risk prediction algorithms: new models to estimate 10-year risk of cardiovascular disease in Europe

    Steven Hageman;Lisa Pennells

  • Genome-wide meta-analysis identifies 11 new loci for anthropometric traits and provides insights into genetic architecture

    Sonja I Berndt;Stefan Gustafsson;Stefan Gustafsson;Reedik Mägi;Reedik Mägi;Andrea Ganna

  • Validity of the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire (GPAQ) in assessing levels and change in moderate-vigorous physical activity and sedentary behaviour

    Claire L Cleland;Claire L Cleland;Ruth F Hunter;Frank Kee;Margaret E Cupples

  • Exome-wide association study of plasma lipids in > 300,000 individuals

    Dajiang J Liu;Gina M Peloso;Gina M Peloso;Haojie Yu;Adam S Butterworth;Adam S Butterworth

  • Synergistic effects of angiotensin-converting enzyme and angiotensin-II type 1 receptor gene polymorphisms on risk of myocardial infarction.

    L Tiret;P Ducimetière;A Bonnardeaux;F Soubrier

  • Rare variant in scavenger receptor BI raises HDL cholesterol and increases risk of coronary heart disease

    Zanoni P;Khetarpal Sa;Larach Db;Hancock-Cerutti Wf

  • Association of common variants in NPPA and NPPB with circulating natriuretic peptides and blood pressure

    Christopher Newton-Cheh;Martin G Larson;Ramachandran S Vasan;Daniel Levy

  • Living risk prediction algorithm (QCOVID) for risk of hospital admission and mortality from coronavirus 19 in adults: national derivation and validation cohort study.

    Ash K Clift;Carol A C Coupland;Ruth H Keogh;Karla Diaz-Ordaz

  • Impact of smoking and smoking cessation on cardiovascular events and mortality among older adults: meta-analysis of individual participant data from prospective cohort studies of the CHANCES consortium

    Ute Mons;Aysel Müezzinler;Aysel Müezzinler;Carolin Gellert;Ben Schöttker

  • Coding Variation in ANGPTL4, LPL, and SVEP1 and the Risk of Coronary Disease

    Nathan O. Stitziel;Kathleen E. Stirrups;Nicholas G. D. Masca;Jeanette Erdmann

  • Is hyperfiltration associated with the future risk of developing diabetic nephropathy? A meta-analysis

    G.M. Magee;R.W. Bilous;R.W. Bilous;Christopher Cardwell;S.J. Hunter

  • Protein-altering variants associated with body mass index implicate pathways that control energy intake and expenditure in obesity

    Valérie Turcot;Yingchang Lu;Yingchang Lu;Heather M Highland;Heather M Highland;Claudia Schurmann

  • Vitamin D and mortality: meta-analysis of individual participant data from a large consortium of cohort studies from Europe and the United States

    Ben Schöttker;Rolf Jorde;Rolf Jorde;Anne Peasey;Barbara Thorand

  • Contribution of 30 biomarkers to 10-year cardiovascular risk estimation in 2 population cohorts: the MONICA, risk, genetics, archiving, and monograph (MORGAM) biomarker project.

    Stefan Blankenberg;Tanja Zeller;Olli Saarela;Aki S. Havulinna

  • Refining the accuracy of validated target identification through coding variant fine-mapping in type 2 diabetes

    Anubha Mahajan;Jennifer Wessel;Sara M. Willems;Wei Zhao

  • Obesity and the lung: 1 · Epidemiology

    K M McClean;Frank Kee;Ian Young;J S Elborn

  • Genome-wide meta-analysis identifies 11 new loci for anthropometric traits and provides insights into genetic architecture

    Sonja I. Berndt;Stefan Gustafsson;Reedik Maegi;Andrea Ganna

Frequent Co-Authors

Kari Kuulasmaa
Kari Kuulasmaa Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare
Jean Ferrières
Jean Ferrières Federal University of Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées
Veikko Salomaa
Veikko Salomaa Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare
Mark A. Tully
Mark A. Tully University of Ulster
Dominique Arveiler
Dominique Arveiler University of Strasbourg
Christopher Patterson
Christopher Patterson Queen's University Belfast
Alun Evans
Alun Evans Queen's University Belfast
Torben Jørgensen
Torben Jørgensen University of Copenhagen
Ian S. Young
Ian S. Young Queen's University Belfast
Markus Perola
Markus Perola Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare

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 are exploring a medical career in the USA, a variety of online degrees can support your journey or offer alternative pathways. For nursing professionals, some online dnp programs without clinicals can help you advance to leadership positions without the traditional on-site requirements.

Aspiring nurses can enter the workforce quickly with fast track lpn programs, which provide accelerated options to begin or enhance your nursing career. Specializations, like in mental health, are also available; some universities now offer a fast track mental health nursing path for those aiming to become experts in psychiatric and mental health care.

For students interested in the business or administrative side of healthcare, an online master of health administration is a practical option. These degrees can lead to roles in hospital management, health policy, or public health organizations.

These flexible online programs allow learners to study at their own pace and balance other commitments, making them ideal stepping stones toward a fulfilling career in the healthcare sector.

Best Scientists Citing Frank Kee

Trending Scientists