World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
58
Citations
10697
World Ranking
4204
National Ranking
1902

George M. Smith publication distribution in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Neuroscience in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where George M. Smith sits on this spectrum.

38–47 publications: 18 scientists 48–57 publications: 79 scientists 58–67 publications: 193 scientists 68–77 publications: 323 scientists 78–87 publications: 406 scientists 88–97 publications: 452 scientists 98–107 publications: 539 scientists 108–117 publications: 505 scientists 118–127 publications: 522 scientists 128–137 publications: 469 scientists 138–147 publications: 456 scientists 148–157 publications: 459 scientists 158–167 publications: 397 scientists 168–177 publications: 383 scientists 178–187 publications: 350 scientists 188–197 publications: 302 scientists 198–207 publications: 306 scientists 208–217 publications: 262 scientists 218–227 publications: 242 scientists 228–237 publications: 220 scientists 238–247 publications: 203 scientists 248–257 publications: 174 scientists 258–267 publications: 176 scientists 268–277 publications: 175 scientists 278–287 publications: 125 scientists 288–297 publications: 116 scientists 298–307 publications: 127 scientists 308–317 publications: 128 scientists 318–327 publications: 99 scientists 328–337 publications: 89 scientists 338–347 publications: 78 scientists 348–357 publications: 96 scientists 358–367 publications: 66 scientists 368–377 publications: 59 scientists 378–387 publications: 65 scientists 388–397 publications: 54 scientists 398–407 publications: 48 scientists 408–417 publications: 49 scientists 418–427 publications: 34 scientists 428–437 publications: 31 scientists 438–447 publications: 30 scientists 448–457 publications: 31 scientists 458–467 publications: 36 scientists 468–477 publications: 40 scientists 478–487 publications: 35 scientists 488–497 publications: 30 scientists 498–507 publications: 23 scientists 508–517 publications: 26 scientists 518–527 publications: 20 scientists 528–537 publications: 23 scientists 538–547 publications: 20 scientists 548–557 publications: 20 scientists 558–567 publications: 17 scientists 568–577 publications: 14 scientists 578–587 publications: 20 scientists 588–597 publications: 20 scientists 598–607 publications: 19 scientists 608–617 publications: 18 scientists 618–627 publications: 17 scientists 628–637 publications: 11 scientists 638–647 publications: 11 scientists 648–657 publications: 11 scientists 658–667 publications: 8 scientists 668–677 publications: 7 scientists 678–687 publications: 11 scientists 688–697 publications: 10 scientists 698–707 publications: 4 scientists 708–717 publications: 6 scientists 718–727 publications: 5 scientists 728–737 publications: 5 scientists 738–747 publications: 9 scientists 748–757 publications: 9 scientists 758–767 publications: 3 scientists 768–777 publications: 7 scientists 778–787 publications: 7 scientists 788–797 publications: 6 scientists 798–807 publications: 2 scientists 808–817 publications: 2 scientists 818–827 publications: 7 scientists 828–837 publications: 0 scientists 838–847 publications: 9 scientists 848–857 publications: 3 scientists 858–867 publications: 1 scientists 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 887+

This scientist: 147 publications — 41st percentile

41% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more.

George M. Smith D-index placement in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Neuroscience scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where George M. Smith sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 42 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 172 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 296 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 435 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 459 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 456 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 467 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 478 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 512 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 435 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 425 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 418 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 392 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 357 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 334 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 328 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 260 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 278 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 239 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 250 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 210 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 200 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 189 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 170 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 146 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 113 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 126 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 100 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 84 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 99 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 84 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 85 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 72 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 76 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 45 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 49 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 43 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 32 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 45 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 50 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 32 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 39 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 29 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 27 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 19 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 23 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 27 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 16 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 24 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 13 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 21 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 17 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 14 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 15 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 10 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 10 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 13 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 9 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 8 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 6 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 6 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 7 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 7 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 10 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 4 scientists 162 D-Index: 8 scientists 163+ D-Index: 100 scientists
30 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 58 D-Index — 57th percentile

57% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more.

Overview

George M. Smith is affiliated with Temple University in the United States. Their research primarily spans the fields of Neuroscience and Medicine, with particular focus on Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, Molecular Biology, Neurology, and Surgery.

The main topics addressed in their work include Spinal Cord Injury Research, Nerve Injury and Regeneration, Neuroscience of Respiration and Sleep, Muscle Activation and Electromyography Studies, Nerve Injury and Rehabilitation, Neonatal Respiratory Health Research, and Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery.

Frequent coauthors collaborating with George M. Smith include Thomas Campion, Kathleen M. Keefe, Andrew J. Spence, Jaclyn T. Eisdorfer, and Rupert D. Smit.

They have published prolifically across several venues, with multiple papers appearing in Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience, Experimental Neurology, and bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory). Additional contributions have appeared in Neurobiology of Disease and PLoS ONE.

Recent papers authored or coauthored by George M. Smith include:

  • Epidural Electrical Stimulation: A Review of Plasticity Mechanisms That Are Hypothesized to Underlie Enhanced Recovery From Spinal Cord Injury With Stimulation, 2020, Frontiers in Molecular Neuroscience
  • Coupled Control of Distal Axon Integrity and Somal Responses to Axonal Damage by the Palmitoyl Acyltransferase ZDHHC17, 2020, Cell Reports
  • LAR inhibitory peptide promotes recovery of diaphragm function and multiple forms of respiratory neural circuit plasticity after cervical spinal cord injury, 2020, Neurobiology of Disease
  • Spinal Cord Injury in Myelomeningocele: Prospects for Therapy, 2020, Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
  • Respiratory axon regeneration in the chronically injured spinal cord, 2021, Neurobiology of Disease

Best Publications

  • Fabrication of drug loaded biodegradable polymer fibers

    Kevin D Nelson;Andres A. Romero-Sanchez;George M. Smith;Nadir Alikacem

  • Changing role of forebrain astrocytes during development, regenerative failure, and induced regeneration upon transplantation

    George M. Smith;Robert H. Miller;Jerry Silver

  • Maturation of astrocytes in vitro alters the extent and molecular basis of neurite outgrowth.

    George M. Smith;Urs Rutishauser;Jerry Silver;Robert H. Miller

  • Targeting Neurotrophins to Specific Populations of Neurons: NGF, BDNF, and NT-3 and Their Relevance for Treatment of Spinal Cord Injury.

    Kathleen M Keefe;Imran S Sheikh;George M Smith

  • Neurofilaments Are Transported Rapidly But Intermittently in Axons: Implications for Slow Axonal Transport

    Subhojit Roy;Pilar Coffee;George Smith;Ronald K. H. Liem

  • Functional regeneration of chronically injured sensory afferents into adult spinal cord after neurotrophin gene therapy.

    Mario I. Romero;Nagarathnamma Rangappa;Mary G. Garry;George M. Smith

  • GDNF-enhanced axonal regeneration and myelination following spinal cord injury is mediated by primary effects on neurons.

    Liqun Zhang;Zhengwen Ma;George M. Smith;Xuejun Wen

  • Growth factor and cytokine regulation of chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans by astrocytes.

    George M. Smith;Celia Strunz

  • Extensive Sprouting of Sensory Afferents and Hyperalgesia Induced by Conditional Expression of Nerve Growth Factor in the Adult Spinal Cord

    Mario I. Romero;Nagarathnamma Rangappa;Li Li;Ellis Lightfoot

  • The role of mitochondria in axon development and regeneration.

    George M. Smith;Gianluca Gallo

  • Family Caregiver Outcomes in Heart Failure

    Susan J. Pressler;Irmina Gradus-Pizlo;Suzanne D. Chubinski;George Smith

  • Poly(L-Lactide) microfilaments enhance peripheral nerve regeneration across extended nerve lesions.

    Teri T B Ngo;Paula J. Waggoner;Andres A. Romero;Kevin D. Nelson

  • Astrocyte-polymer implants promote regeneration of dorsal root fibers into the adult mammalian spinal cord

    Michel Kliot;George M. Smith;Joel D. Siegal;Jerry Silver

  • Semaphorin III can repulse and inhibit adult sensory afferents in vivo.

    Darrell L. Tanelian;Michael A. Barry;Michael A. Barry;Stephen Albert Johnston;Thuy Le

  • Plasticity After Spinal Cord Injury: Relevance to Recovery and Approaches to Facilitate It

    Stephen M. Onifer;George M. Smith;Karim Fouad

  • Permeable guidance channels containing microfilament scaffolds enhance axon growth and maturation.

    Jie Cai;Xuejun Peng;Kevin D. Nelson;Robert Eberhart

  • Laminin-coated poly(L-lactide) filaments induce robust neurite growth while providing directional orientation.

    Nagarathnamma Rangappa;Andres Romero;Kevin D. Nelson;Robert C. Eberhart

  • A Novel Growth-Promoting Pathway Formed by GDNF-Overexpressing Schwann Cells Promotes Propriospinal Axonal Regeneration, Synapse Formation, and Partial Recovery of Function after Spinal Cord Injury

    Ling Xiao Deng;Ping Deng;Yiwen Ruan;Zao Cheng Xu

  • Genetic manipulation of intraspinal plasticity after spinal cord injury alters the severity of autonomic dysreflexia.

    Adrian A. Cameron;George M. Smith;David C. Randall;David R. Brown

  • Semaphorin3A Inhibits Nerve Growth Factor-Induced Sprouting of Nociceptive Afferents in Adult Rat Spinal Cord

    Xiao-Qing Tang;Darrell L. Tanelian;George M. Smith

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

When considering a future in Neuroscience, it’s helpful to explore overlapping fields and flexible education options. With the rising demand for professionals in science and healthcare, many students investigate the highest paid college majors to gauge salary expectations and professional opportunities after graduation.

For those seeking affordability and flexibility, enrolling in an online college that accepts fafsa makes quality education more accessible. This is especially useful for students who want to balance studies with work or personal commitments.

Shorter options like online certifications can also pave the way to well-paying roles in technology, health administration, and data analysis—complementary skills for careers in neuroscience.

Not sure if a neuroscience degree is your only path? Consider the cheapest easiest online degree options to broaden your knowledge base and employment prospects.

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles