World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
86
Citations
35919
World Ranking
13921
National Ranking
1287

Gene Feder 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 Gene Feder 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: 528 publications — 62nd percentile

62% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Gene Feder 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 Gene Feder 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: 86 D-Index — 31st percentile

31% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Gene Feder is affiliated with the University of Bristol in the United Kingdom. Their research spans multiple disciplines, primarily social sciences and psychology, with a strong emphasis on health-related fields.

The main fields of study for their work include:

  • Social Sciences
  • Psychology

Within these fields, they focus on several subfields, particularly those connected to health and social issues:

  • Health
  • Clinical Psychology
  • General Health Professions
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health

Gene Feder's research topics cover a range of concerns related to violence, trauma, and health, including:

  • Intimate Partner and Family Violence
  • Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health
  • Migration, Health and Trauma
  • Global Maternal and Child Health
  • Sexual Assault and Victimization Studies
  • Homicide, Infanticide, and Child Abuse

Their publication record includes contributions to well-known journals and venues. The most frequent publication venues are:

  • Research Square (Research Square)
  • BMJ Open
  • British Journal of General Practice
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • BMC Public Health

Selected recent papers authored or co-authored by Gene Feder include:

  • "Wider collateral damage to children in the UK because of the social distancing measures designed to reduce the impact of COVID-19 in adults" (2020, BMJ Paediatrics Open)
  • "Health practitioners' readiness to address domestic violence and abuse: A qualitative meta-synthesis" (2020, PLoS ONE)
  • "Categories and health impacts of intimate partner violence in the World Health Organization multi-country study on women's health and domestic violence" (2020, International Journal of Epidemiology)
  • "Psychological therapies for women who experience intimate partner violence" (2020, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews)
  • "Women's experiences and expectations after disclosure of intimate partner abuse to a healthcare provider: A qualitative meta-synthesis" (2020, BMJ Open)

Frequent collaborators in their research include:

  • Eszter Szilassy
  • Loraine Bacchus
  • Estela Capelas Barbosa
  • Manuela Colombini
  • Christine Barter

Best Publications

  • AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care

    Melissa C. Brouwers;Michelle E. Kho;George P. Browman;Jako S. Burgers

  • AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in health care.

    Melissa C Brouwers;Michelle E Kho;George P Browman;Jako S Burgers

  • Experiences of Domestic Violence and Mental Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

    Kylee Trevillion;Siân Oram;Gene S Feder;Louise M Howard

  • The health-systems response to violence against women

    Claudia García-Moreno;Kelsey Hegarty;Ana Flavia Lucas d'Oliveira;Jane Koziol-McLain

  • Women exposed to intimate partner violence: expectations and experiences when they encounter health care professionals: a meta-analysis of qualitative studies.

    Gene S. Feder;Madeleine Hutson;Jason Ramsay;Ann R. Taket

  • Should health professionals screen women for domestic violence? Systematic review.

    Jason Ramsay;Julie Richardson;Yvonne H. Carter;Leslie L. Davidson

  • Ethnic variations in pathways to and use of specialist mental health services in the UK - Systematic review

    Kamaldeep Bhui;Stephen Stansfeld;Sally Hull;Stefan Priebe

  • Domestic Violence and Perinatal Mental Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

    Louise M Howard;Sian Oram;Helen Galley;Kylee Trevillion

  • Relation between childhood sexual and physical abuse and risk of revictimisation in women: a cross-sectional survey.

    Jeremy Coid;Ann Petruckevitch;Gene Feder;Wai-Shan Chung

  • Identifying domestic violence: cross sectional study in primary care

    Jo Richardson;Jeremy W. Coid;Ann Petruckevitch;Wai Shan Chung

  • Clinical guidelines: using clinical guidelines.

    Gene Feder;Martin Eccles;Richard Grol;Chris Griffiths

  • Development of the AGREE II, part 1: performance, usefulness and areas for improvement

    Melissa C. Brouwers;Michelle E. Kho;George P. Browman;Jako S. Burgers

  • Development of the AGREE II, part 2: assessment of validity of items and tools to support application

    Melissa C. Brouwers;Michelle E. Kho;George P. Browman;Jako S. Burgers

  • Screening women for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings

    Lorna O'Doherty;Kelsey Hegarty;Jean Ramsay;Leslie L Davidson

  • "Medication career" or "Moral career"? The two sides of managing antidepressants: a meta-ethnography of patients' experience of antidepressants

    Alice Malpass;Alison Shaw;Debbie Sharp;Fiona Walter

  • Guidelines for the prevention of falls in people over 65

    Gene Feder;Colin Cryer;Sheila Donovan;Yvonne Carter

  • How far does screening women for domestic (partner) violence in different health-care settings meet criteria for a screening programme? Systematic reviews of nine UK National Screening Committee criteria.

    G. Feder;Jason Ramsay;Danielle Dunne;M. Rose

  • Identification and Referral to Improve Safety (IRIS) of women experiencing domestic violence with a primary care training and support programme: a cluster randomised controlled trial

    Gene Feder;Roxane Agnew Davies;Kathleen Baird;Danielle Dunne

  • Advocacy interventions to reduce or eliminate violence and promote the physical and psychosocial well‐being of women who experience intimate partner abuse

    Carol Rivas;Jean Ramsay;Laura Sadowski;Leslie L Davidson

  • Development and application of a generic methodology to assess the quality of clinical guidelines.

    Francoise A. Cluzeau;Peter Littlejohns;Jeremy M. Grimshaw;Gene Feder

Frequent Co-Authors

Harry Hemingway
Harry Hemingway University College London
Kelsey Hegarty
Kelsey Hegarty University of Melbourne
Marianne Hester
Marianne Hester University of Bristol
Nicky Stanley
Nicky Stanley University of Central Lancashire
Louise M. Howard
Louise M. Howard King's College London
Harriet L. MacMillan
Harriet L. MacMillan McMaster University
Angela Taft
Angela Taft La Trobe University
Deborah Sharp
Deborah Sharp University of Bristol
Aroon D. Hingorani
Aroon D. Hingorani University College London
Jeremy M. Grimshaw
Jeremy M. Grimshaw Ottawa Hospital

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

In addition to traditional medical studies, there are many online routes to start or advance your healthcare career in the USA. If you’re interested in administrative roles, financial aid for medical billing and coding online classes can help make certification more affordable and accessible. Graduates in this field are in high demand for hospital and clinic operations.

For those wanting to pursue nursing, you may wish to explore nursing schools that don't require teas or hesi, which can significantly streamline your admissions process. There are also advanced options for nurses; if you hold an associate degree, online adn to np programs online allow you to efficiently progress to a nurse practitioner role.

Meanwhile, aspiring leaders should consider a healthcare administration degree online accredited program. These courses offer flexibility and the essential skills needed for supervisory and executive healthcare positions.

With a variety of online pathways now available, it’s easier than ever to find the right program to fit your goals and schedule in the growing healthcare sector.

Best Scientists Citing Gene Feder

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles