World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Social Sciences and Humanities

D-Index
45
Citations
14221
World Ranking
3759
National Ranking
645

Geoff Wong 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 Geoff Wong sits on this spectrum.

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 publications 570+

This scientist: 156 publications — 45th percentile

45% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Geoff Wong 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 Geoff Wong sits on this spectrum.

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: 45 D-Index — 52nd percentile

52% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Best Publications

  • RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses

    Geoff Wong;Trish Greenhalgh;Gill Westhorp;Jeanette Buckingham

  • Uncovering the Benefits of Participatory Research: Implications of a Realist Review for Health Research and Practice

    Justin Jagosh;Ann C. Macaulay;Pierre Pluye;Jon Salsberg

  • RAMESES publication standards: meta-narrative reviews

    Geoff Wong;Trish Greenhalgh;Gill Westhorp;Jeanette Buckingham

  • RAMESES II reporting standards for realist evaluations

    Geoff Wong;Gill Westhorp;Ana Manzano;Joanne Greenhalgh

  • A realist evaluation of community-based participatory research: partnership synergy, trust building and related ripple effects

    Justin Jagosh;Paula L. Bush;Jon Salsberg;Ann C. Macaulay

  • Tensions and paradoxes in electronic patient record research: a systematic literature review using the meta-narrative method.

    Trisha Greenhalgh;Henry W W Potts;Geoff Wong;Pippa Bark

  • Internet-based medical education: a realist review of what works, for whom and in what circumstances.

    Geoff Wong;Trisha Greenhalgh;Ray Pawson

  • Realist methods in medical education research: what are they and what can they contribute?

    Geoff Wong;Trisha Greenhalgh;Gill Westhorp;Ray Pawson

  • Family-based interventions to increase physical activity in children: a systematic review, meta-analysis and realist synthesis

    H. E. Brown;A. J. Atkin;J. Panter;G. Wong

  • Can We Systematically Review Studies That Evaluate Complex Interventions

    Sasha Shepperd;Simon Lewin;Sharon Straus;Mike Clarke;Mike Clarke

  • Protocol - realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis: Evolving Standards (RAMESES)

    Trisha Greenhalgh;Geoff Wong;Gill Westhorp;Ray Pawson

  • Development of methodological guidance, publication standards and training materials for realist and meta-narrative reviews: the RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses – Evolving Standards) project

    Geoff Wong;Trish Greenhalgh;Gill Westhorp;Ray Pawson

  • Realist RCTs of complex interventions - an oxymoron.

    Bruno Marchal;Gill Westhorp;Geoff Wong;Sara Van Belle

  • Known Knowns, Known Unknowns, Unknown Unknowns: The Predicament of Evidence-Based Policy

    Ray Pawson;Geoff Wong;Lesley Owen

  • Supporting social prescribing in primary care by linking people to local assets: a realist review

    Stephanie Tierney;Geoff Wong;Nia Roberts;Anne-Marie Boylan

  • Protocol-the RAMESES II study: Developing guidance and reporting standards for realist evaluation

    Trish Greenhalgh;Geoff Wong;Justin Jagosh;Joanne Greenhalgh

  • Critical reflections on realist review: insights from customizing the methodology to the needs of participatory research assessment

    Justin Jagosh;Pierre Pluye;Geoff Wong;Margaret Cargo

  • Quality and reporting standards, resources, training materials and information for realist evaluation: the RAMESES II project

    Geoff Wong;Gillian Westhorp;Joanne Greenhalgh;Ana Manzano

  • Effectiveness of interventions for managing multiple high-burden chronic diseases in older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Monika Kastner;Roberta Cardoso;Yonda Lai;Victoria Treister

  • Assessing the outcomes of participatory research: protocol for identifying, selecting, appraising and synthesizing the literature for realist review.

    Justin Jagosh;Pierre Pluye;Ann C Macaulay;Jon Salsberg

  • How design of places promotes or inhibits mobility of older adults: realist synthesis of 20 years of research.

    Irene H. Yen;Johnna Fandel Flood;Hannah Thompson;Lynda A. Anderson

Frequent Co-Authors

Ray Pawson
Ray Pawson University of Leeds
Trisha Greenhalgh
Trisha Greenhalgh University of Oxford
Andrew Booth
Andrew Booth University of Sheffield
Ann C. Macaulay
Ann C. Macaulay McGill University
Margaret Cargo
Margaret Cargo University of Canberra
Sharon E. Straus
Sharon E. Straus University of Toronto
Pierre Pluye
Pierre Pluye McGill University
Lawrence W. Green
Lawrence W. Green University of California, San Francisco
Bruno Marchal
Bruno Marchal Institute of Tropical Medicine Antwerp
Joanne Greenhalgh
Joanne Greenhalgh University of Leeds

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 a career in Social Sciences or Humanities opens up a wide range of opportunities—and online degree programs make it more accessible than ever. For those seeking an advanced qualification in the shortest possible time, a 1 year online master's in social work can fast-track your journey to working in social services or clinical roles.

If you're interested in psychology, an accelerated psychology bachelor's degree provides a quicker route to careers in counseling, mental health services, or continuing to graduate study.

For those focusing on counseling, choosing cacrep accredited schools ensures your degree meets the highest professional standards, which is essential for licensure and employment.

Interested in supporting families and couples? A mft degree online allows you to specialize in marriage and family therapy, paving the way to impactful work in community agencies or private practice.

Online programs offer flexibility, but it's vital to make informed choices about accreditation, program length, and career goals for long-term success.

Best Scientists Citing Geoff Wong

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles