World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
76
Citations
26708
World Ranking
18662
National Ranking
1688

Gordon C. S. Smith 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 Gordon C. S. Smith 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: 376 publications — 33rd percentile

33% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Gordon C. S. Smith 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 Gordon C. S. Smith 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: 76 D-Index — 8th percentile

8% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Gordon C. S. Smith is affiliated with the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom and has made extensive contributions to the field of medicine, with a particular focus on obstetrics and gynecology. Their research encompasses a broad spectrum of topics related to pregnancy, fetal development, and maternal health.

The main fields of study in which they are active include Medicine, with substantial work in several subfields such as Obstetrics and Gynecology, Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Molecular Biology, and Cancer Research.

Their key research topics include:

  • Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
  • Birth, Development, and Health
  • Gestational Diabetes Research and Management
  • Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
  • Maternal and fetal healthcare
  • Maternal and Perinatal Health Interventions
  • Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy

Smith has contributed to a variety of significant peer-reviewed publications. Some recent papers include:

  • "Questioning the fetal microbiome illustrates pitfalls of low-biomass microbial studies," 2023, Nature
  • "Inherent mosaicism and extensive mutation of human placentas," 2021, Nature
  • "The RNA landscape of the human placenta in health and disease," 2021, Nature Communications
  • "GDF15 linked to maternal risk of nausea and vomiting during pregnancy," 2023, Nature
  • "Placental energy metabolism in health and disease-significance of development and implications for preeclampsia," 2020, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Frequent collaborators in Smith's research include Ulla Sovio, D. Stephen Charnock-Jones, Emma Cook, Francesca Gaccioli, and Debbie A. Lawlor, with multiple coauthored publications across their careers.

Smith's work has been published predominantly in several respected venues, reflecting the focus and impact of their research:

  • BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
  • American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • Nature
  • PLoS Medicine

Best Publications

  • Major risk factors for stillbirth in high-income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis

    Vicki Flenady;Laura Koopmans;Philippa Middleton;J. Frederik Frøen

  • Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma related to gravitational challenge: systematic review of randomised controlled trials.

    Gordon C S Smith;Jill P Pell

  • Pregnancy complications and maternal risk of ischaemic heart disease: a retrospective cohort study of 129,290 births.

    Gordon C S Smith;Jill P Pell;David Walsh

  • Screening for Fetal Growth Restriction With Universal Third Trimester Ultrasonography in Nulliparous Women in the Pregnancy Outcome Prediction (POP) Study: A Prospective Cohort Study

    Ulla Sovio;Ian R. White;Alison Dacey;Dharmintra Pasupathy

  • Early Pregnancy Levels of Pregnancy-Associated Plasma Protein A and the Risk of Intrauterine Growth Restriction, Premature Birth, Preeclampsia, and Stillbirth

    Gordon C. S. Smith;Emily J. Stenhouse;Jennifer A. Crossley;David A. Aitken

  • Stillbirths: the way forward in high-income countries.

    Vicki Flenady;Philippa Middleton;Gordon C Smith;Wes Duke

  • Stillbirths: recall to action in high-income countries

    Vicki Flenady;Aleena M Wojcieszek;Philippa Middleton;David Ellwood

  • Human placenta has no microbiome but can contain potential pathogens.

    Marcus C. de Goffau;Marcus C. de Goffau;Susanne Lager;Susanne Lager;Susanne Lager;Ulla Sovio;Ulla Sovio;Francesca Gaccioli;Francesca Gaccioli

  • Caesarean section and risk of unexplained stillbirth in subsequent pregnancy

    Gordon Cs Smith;Jill P Pell;Richard Bobbie

  • Gestational Age at Delivery and Special Educational Need: Retrospective Cohort Study of 407,503 Schoolchildren

    Daniel F. MacKay;Gordon C. S. Smith;Richard Dobbie;Jill P. Pell

  • Interpregnancy Interval and Risk of Preterm Birth and Neonatal Death: Retrospective Cohort Study

    Gordon C S Smith;Jill P Pell;Richard Dobbie

  • Risk of Perinatal Death Associated With Labor After Previous Cesarean Delivery in Uncomplicated Term Pregnancies

    Gordon C. S. Smith;Jill P. Pell;Alan D. Cameron;Richard Dobbie

  • Teenage pregnancy and risk of adverse perinatal outcomes associated with first and second births: Population based retrospective cohort study

    Gordon C. S. Smith;Jill P. Pell

  • An integrated model for the prediction of preeclampsia using maternal factors and uterine artery Doppler velocimetry in unselected low-risk women.

    Christina K.H. Yu;Gordon C.S. Smith;Aris T. Papageorghiou;Ana Maria Cacho

  • First-trimester growth and the risk of low birth weight.

    Gordon C.S. Smith;Malcolm F.S. Smith;Margaret B. McNay;John E.E. Fleming

  • Life-table analysis of the risk of perinatal death at term and post term in singleton pregnancies.

    Gordon C.S. Smith

  • Apgar Score and the Risk of Cause-specific Infant Mortality: A Population-based Cohort Study

    S. Iliodromiti;D.F. Mackay;G.C. Smith;J.P. Pell

  • Maternal obesity in early pregnancy and risk of spontaneous and elective preterm deliveries: a retrospective cohort study.

    Gordon C.S. Smith;Imran Shah;Jill P. Pell;Jennifer A. Crossley

  • Cervical length and obstetric history predict spontaneous preterm birth: development and validation of a model to provide individualized risk assessment.

    E Celik;M To;K Gajewska;G C S Smith

  • Recognizing the reagent microbiome.

    Marcus C. de Goffau;Susanne Lager;Susannah J. Salter;Josef Wagner

Frequent Co-Authors

Ulla Sovio
Ulla Sovio University of Cambridge
Jill P. Pell
Jill P. Pell University of Glasgow
Ian R. White
Ian R. White University College London
Aris T. Papageorghiou
Aris T. Papageorghiou University of Oxford
Peter Brocklehurst
Peter Brocklehurst University of Birmingham
Sharon J. Peacock
Sharon J. Peacock University of Cambridge
Stephen C. Robson
Stephen C. Robson Newcastle University
Muzlifah Haniffa
Muzlifah Haniffa Newcastle University
Sam Behjati
Sam Behjati Wellcome Sanger Institute
Ben Willem J. Mol
Ben Willem J. Mol Monash University

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

For students interested in health professions beyond traditional medical school, a variety of flexible online nursing and healthcare programs are available. If you’re looking to advance from a registered nurse to a bachelor’s degree, explore the rn to bsn with no clinicals option, which allows for career growth without the need for additional hands-on experience.

Already have a nursing background? The fastest dnp online program can help you quickly earn a Doctor of Nursing Practice degree. If convenience is key, some online dnp programs without clinicals reduce the need for on-site training, making it easier for working professionals to advance.

Interested in a more direct entry to the nursing field? For aspiring licensed practical nurses, discover what is the fastest way to become an lpn and begin your healthcare journey sooner. These online pathways provide valuable alternatives and stepping stones for a range of medical careers in the USA.

Best Scientists Citing Gordon C. S. Smith

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles