World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
74
Citations
25989
World Ranking
19310
National Ranking
9622

James E. Haddow 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 James E. Haddow 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: 354 publications — 28th percentile

28% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

James E. Haddow 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 James E. Haddow 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: 74 D-Index — 4th percentile

4% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

James E. Haddow is affiliated with Brown University in the United States. Their research primarily spans the fields of Business, Management and Accounting as well as Computer Science. The work engages with subfields including Information Systems, Management Information Systems, and Strategy and Management.

The research topics covered by James E. Haddow focus on Information and Cyber Security, Information Technology Governance and Strategy, and Supply Chain Resilience and Risk Management.

Among recent scholarly contributions, James E. Haddow co-authored the paper titled PRISM: a strategic decision framework for cybersecurity risk assessment, published in 2020 in the journal Information and Computer Security. This publication has received citations within academic literature.

  • PRISM: a strategic decision framework for cybersecurity risk assessment (2020), Information and Computer Security

Frequent collaborators include:

  • Rajni Goel
  • Anupam Kumar

James E. Haddow's research has been published primarily in the venue Information and Computer Security.

  • Information and Computer Security

Best Publications

  • Maternal Thyroid Deficiency During Pregnancy and Subsequent Neuropsychological Development of the Child

    James E. Haddow;Glenn E. Palomaki;Walter C. Allan;Josephine R. Williams

  • Maternal serum screening for Down's syndrome in early pregnancy.

    N. J. Wald;H. S. Cuckle;J. W. Densem;K. Nanchahal

  • Cigarette smoking and serum lipid and lipoprotein concentrations: an analysis of published data.

    W. Y. Craig;G. E. Palomaki;J. E. Haddow

  • Dna Sequencing of Maternal Plasma to Detect Down Syndrome: An International Clinical Validation Study

    Glenn E. Palomaki;Edward M. Kloza;Geralyn M. Lambert-Messerlian;James E. Haddow

  • Maternal thyroid deficiency and pregnancy complications: implications for population screening.

    W C Allan;J E Haddow;G E Palomaki;J R Williams

  • The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Initiative: methods of the EGAPP Working Group.

    Steven M. Teutsch;Linda A. Bradley;Glenn E. Palomaki;James E. Haddow

  • DNA sequencing of maternal plasma reliably identifies trisomy 18 and trisomy 13 as well as Down syndrome: an international collaborative study

    Glenn E. Palomaki;Cosmin Deciu;Edward M. Kloza;Geralyn M. Lambert-Messerlian

  • Association between Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Exacerbations of Asthma in Children

    Barbara A. Chilmonczyk;Luis M. Salmun;Keith N. Megathlin;Louis M. Neveux

  • Prenatal screening for Down's syndrome with use of maternal serum markers.

    James E. Haddow;Glenn E. Palomaki;George J. Knight;Josephine Williams

  • Prevalence of thyroid deficiency in pregnant women.

    R Z Klein;J E Haddow;J D Faix;R S Brown

  • Low second trimester maternal serum unconjugated oestriol in pregnancies with Down's syndrome

    J. A. Canick;G. J. Knight;G. E. Palomak;J. E. Haddow

  • The impact of maternal plasma DNA fetal fraction on next generation sequencing tests for common fetal aneuploidies.

    Jacob A. Canick;Glenn E. Palomaki;Edward M. Kloza;Geralyn M. Lambert-Messerlian

  • Apolipoproteins and ischaemic heart disease: implications for screening

    N Wald;H Watt;A Bailey;M Johnson

  • Screening of Maternal Serum for Fetal Down's Syndrome in the First Trimester

    James E. Haddow;Glenn E. Palomaki;George J. Knight;Josephine Williams

  • Lipoprotein(a) as a risk factor for ischemic heart disease: metaanalysis of prospective studies

    Wendy Y. Craig;Louis M. Neveux;Glenn E. Palomaki;Meghan M. Cleveland

  • Reducing the need for amniocentesis in women 35 years of age or older with serum markers for screening.

    James E. Haddow;Glenn E. Palomaki;George J. Knight;George C. Cunningham

  • Maternal serum unconjugated oestriol as an antenatal screening test for Down's syndrome

    N. J. Wald;H. S. Cuckle;J. W. Densem;K. Nanchahal

  • Urinary cotinine as marker of breathing other people's tobacco smoke.

    NicholasJ. Wald;Jillian Boreham;Alan Bailey;Carolyn Ritchie

  • Genetic Test Evaluation: Information Needs of Clinicians, Policy Makers, and the Public

    Wylie Burke;David Atkins;Marta Gwinn;Alan Guttmacher

  • Prevalence of abnormal thyroid function test results in patients with acute medical illnesses

    Michael M. Kaplan;P.Reed Larsen;Frank R. Crantz;Victor J. Dzau

Frequent Co-Authors

Glenn E. Palomaki
Glenn E. Palomaki Brown University
Nicholas J. Wald
Nicholas J. Wald Queen Mary University of London
Mary E. D'Alton
Mary E. D'Alton Columbia University
David A. Nyberg
David A. Nyberg University of Washington
Patrick Royston
Patrick Royston University College London
Dirk van den Boom
Dirk van den Boom Sequenom (United States)
Allan Hackshaw
Allan Hackshaw University College London
S. Ananth Karumanchi
S. Ananth Karumanchi Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
Richard I. Kelley
Richard I. Kelley Kennedy Krieger Institute
Stanley F. Nelson
Stanley F. Nelson University of California, Los Angeles

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 alternative online programs can open doors to rewarding careers in healthcare beyond a traditional MD. Many students are now considering online direct entry msn programs for non-nurses, which allow individuals with a non-nursing background to fast-track their entry into advanced nursing roles. These programs are designed for career changers who want to make an impact in patient care without a lengthy, traditional pathway.

For those seeking accessible options, there are easy nursing programs to get into, which help alleviate common application hurdles. Certain schools also offer flexibility by being nursing schools that don't require teas, removing extra testing barriers for aspiring nurses.

Outside of nursing, administration fields are another practical path. Accredited online medical billing and coding schools that accept fafsa allow students to train remotely, often with financial aid. Whether you aspire to a clinical or administrative career, the flexibility and variety of online healthcare degrees make career advancement more accessible than ever.

Best Scientists Citing James E. Haddow

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles