World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Psychology 51 5290 4907 306 298 119 8233

Jane L. Mathias publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Jane L. Mathias between 1990 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Jane L. Mathias published across 36 years, from 1990 to 2025, averaging 3.8 papers a year. Output peaked at 13 publications in 2011. 2 of the 136 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1990 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 13. Peak 13 publications in 2011. 1990: 1 publication 1991: 0 publications 1992: 4 publications 1993: 0 publications 1994: 0 publications 1995: 2 publications 1996: 2 publications 1997: 0 publications 1998: 1 publication 1999: 1 publication 2000: 0 publications 2001: 2 publications 2002: 1 publication 2003: 1 publication 2004: 3 publications 2005: 2 publications 2006: 4 publications 2007: 7 publications 2008: 6 publications 2009: 5 publications 2010: 10 publications 2011: 13 publications 2012: 8 publications 2013: 10 publications 2014: 7 publications 2015: 5 publications 2016: 11 publications 2017: 5 publications 2018: 5 publications 2019: 4 publications 2020: 7 publications 2021: 3 publications 2022: 1 publication 2023: 3 publications 2024: 0 publications 2025: 2 publications
1990 2025

136 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Jane L. Mathias: publications per year, 1990 to 2025
Year Publications
1990 1
1991 0
1992 4
1993 0
1994 0
1995 2
1996 2
1997 0
1998 1
1999 1
2000 0
2001 2
2002 1
2003 1
2004 3
2005 2
2006 4
2007 7
2008 6
2009 5
2010 10
2011 13
2012 8
2013 10
2014 7
2015 5
2016 11
2017 5
2018 5
2019 4
2020 7
2021 3
2022 1
2023 3
2024 0
2025 2
Total 136
Download as CSV

Jane L. Mathias publication distribution in Psychology in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Psychology in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Jane L. Mathias sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 69 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 31–40 to 705+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 736. Most scientists, 736, have 101–110 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 111–120 publications, is where this scientist sits. 31–40 publications: 6 scientists 41–50 publications: 52 scientists 51–60 publications: 138 scientists 61–70 publications: 299 scientists 71–80 publications: 461 scientists 81–90 publications: 605 scientists 91–100 publications: 713 scientists 101–110 publications: 736 scientists 111–120 publications: 686 scientists 121–130 publications: 670 scientists 131–140 publications: 644 scientists 141–150 publications: 597 scientists 151–160 publications: 576 scientists 161–170 publications: 477 scientists 171–180 publications: 450 scientists 181–190 publications: 397 scientists 191–200 publications: 343 scientists 201–210 publications: 328 scientists 211–220 publications: 313 scientists 221–230 publications: 283 scientists 231–240 publications: 226 scientists 241–250 publications: 196 scientists 251–260 publications: 201 scientists 261–270 publications: 171 scientists 271–280 publications: 151 scientists 281–290 publications: 139 scientists 291–300 publications: 113 scientists 301–310 publications: 102 scientists 311–320 publications: 100 scientists 321–330 publications: 76 scientists 331–340 publications: 92 scientists 341–350 publications: 85 scientists 351–360 publications: 69 scientists 361–370 publications: 71 scientists 371–380 publications: 63 scientists 381–390 publications: 58 scientists 391–400 publications: 57 scientists 401–410 publications: 43 scientists 411–420 publications: 33 scientists 421–430 publications: 50 scientists 431–440 publications: 41 scientists 441–450 publications: 32 scientists 451–460 publications: 27 scientists 461–470 publications: 28 scientists 471–480 publications: 25 scientists 481–490 publications: 28 scientists 491–500 publications: 20 scientists 501–510 publications: 23 scientists 511–520 publications: 26 scientists 521–530 publications: 17 scientists 531–540 publications: 21 scientists 541–550 publications: 14 scientists 551–560 publications: 16 scientists 561–570 publications: 10 scientists 571–580 publications: 22 scientists 581–590 publications: 9 scientists 591–600 publications: 14 scientists 601–610 publications: 9 scientists 611–620 publications: 11 scientists 621–630 publications: 4 scientists 631–640 publications: 7 scientists 641–650 publications: 5 scientists 651–660 publications: 10 scientists 661–670 publications: 8 scientists 671–680 publications: 8 scientists 681–690 publications: 4 scientists 691–700 publications: 3 scientists 701–704 publications: 4 scientists 705+ publications: 100 scientists
31–40 publications 705+

This scientist: 119 publications — 32nd percentile

32% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
31–40 6
41–50 52
51–60 138
61–70 299
71–80 461
81–90 605
91–100 713
101–110 736
111–120 686 119
121–130 670
131–140 644
141–150 597
151–160 576
161–170 477
171–180 450
181–190 397
191–200 343
201–210 328
211–220 313
221–230 283
231–240 226
241–250 196
251–260 201
261–270 171
271–280 151
281–290 139
291–300 113
301–310 102
311–320 100
321–330 76
331–340 92
341–350 85
351–360 69
361–370 71
371–380 63
381–390 58
391–400 57
401–410 43
411–420 33
421–430 50
431–440 41
441–450 32
451–460 27
461–470 28
471–480 25
481–490 28
491–500 20
501–510 23
511–520 26
521–530 17
531–540 21
541–550 14
551–560 16
561–570 10
571–580 22
581–590 9
591–600 14
601–610 9
611–620 11
621–630 4
631–640 7
641–650 5
651–660 10
661–670 8
671–680 8
681–690 4
691–700 3
701–704 4
705+ 100
Download as CSV

Jane L. Mathias D-index placement in Psychology in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Psychology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Jane L. Mathias sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 58 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 144+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 702. Most scientists, 702, have 32–33 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 50–51 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 30–31 D-Index: 398 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 702 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 671 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 659 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 641 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 671 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 617 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 558 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 495 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 487 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 445 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 390 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 408 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 345 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 325 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 321 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 248 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 290 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 218 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 219 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 215 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 183 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 169 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 132 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 137 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 120 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 112 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 86 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 101 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 83 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 77 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 70 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 78 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 58 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 53 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 57 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 48 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 53 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 46 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 24 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 35 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 27 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 31 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 22 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 16 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 24 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 18 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 11 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 19 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 10 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 16 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 10 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 12 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 8 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 5 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 12 scientists 144+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30–31 D-Index 144+

This scientist: 51 D-Index — 56th percentile

56% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 398
32–33 702
34–35 671
36–37 659
38–39 641
40–41 671
42–43 617
44–45 558
46–47 495
48–49 487
50–51 445 51
52–53 390
54–55 408
56–57 345
58–59 325
60–61 321
62–63 248
64–65 290
66–67 218
68–69 219
70–71 215
72–73 183
74–75 169
76–77 132
78–79 137
80–81 120
82–83 112
84–85 86
86–87 101
88–89 83
90–91 77
92–93 70
94–95 78
96–97 58
98–99 53
100–101 57
102–103 48
104–105 53
106–107 46
108–109 24
110–111 35
112–113 27
114–115 32
116–117 31
118–119 22
120–121 16
122–123 24
124–125 18
126–127 11
128–129 19
130–131 10
132–133 16
134–135 10
136–137 12
138–139 8
140–141 5
142–143 12
144+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

Jane L. Mathias is affiliated with the University of Adelaide in Australia and focuses their research primarily in the field of Medicine. Their work particularly concentrates on Psychiatry and Mental Health, Epidemiology, Genetics, Physiology, and Clinical Psychology.

The scientist's research covers several main topics including:

  • Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
  • Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Frailty in Older Adults
  • Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
  • Alzheimer's Disease Research and Treatments
  • Family Caregiving in Mental Illness
  • Tryptophan and Brain Disorders

Recent publications by Jane L. Mathias demonstrate this focus across various domains:

  • "Risk of Dementia in persons who have previously experienced clinically-significant Depression, Anxiety, or PTSD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis" (2020) in the Journal of Affective Disorders
  • "Inflammatory markers in persons with clinically-significant depression, anxiety or PTSD: A systematic review and meta-analysis" (2023) in the Journal of Psychiatric Research
  • "A fixel-based analysis of micro- and macro-structural changes to white matter following adult traumatic brain injury" (2020) in Human Brain Mapping
  • "Cognitive, behavioral and psychological functioning of children and adults with conservatively managed metopic synostosis" (2020) in Child Neuropsychology
  • "Effectiveness of sorting tests for detecting cognitive decline in older adults with dementia and other common neurodegenerative disorders: A meta-analysis" (2020) in Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

Jane L. Mathias has frequently collaborated with several researchers in related areas. Notable coauthors include:

  • Amie Foran
  • Stephen C. Bowden
  • Lynn Ward
  • J.K. Kuring
  • Erica J. Wallace

Publication venues where Mathias's research is often found include:

  • Journal of Affective Disorders
  • Journal of Psychiatric Research
  • Human Brain Mapping
  • Child Neuropsychology
  • Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

Best Publications

  • Prevalence of sleep disturbances, disorders, and problems following traumatic brain injury: a meta-analysis.

    J.L. Mathias;P.K. Alvaro

  • Self-regulation of driving and its relationship to driving ability among older adults

    Matthew Robert Justin Baldock;J. L. Mathias;A. J. McLean;Angela Berndt

  • Changes in attention and information-processing speed following severe traumatic brain injury: A meta-analytic review.

    Jane L. Mathias;Patricia Wheaton

  • Cognitive predictors of unsafe driving in older drivers: a meta-analysis.

    J. L. Mathias;L. K. Lucas

  • Sleep disturbances and sleep disorders in adults living with chronic pain: a meta-analysis.

    J.L. Mathias;M.L. Cant;A.L.J. Burke

  • Psychological functioning of people living with chronic pain: a meta-analytic review.

    Anne L. J. Burke;Anne L. J. Burke;Jane L. Mathias;Linley A. Denson

  • Neuropsychological deficits in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease: a meta-analytic review.

    Amanda Hutchinson;Jane Mathias

  • Validity of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) as a Screening Test for Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) in a Cardiovascular Population

    Skye Nadine McLennan;Jane Mathias;Lucy Brennan;Simon Stewart

  • Hormone therapy, timing of initiation, and cognition in women aged older than 60 years: the REMEMBER pilot study.

    Alastair H MacLennan;Victor W Henderson;Bronwen J Paine;Jane Mathias

  • Neuropsychological and information processing deficits following mild traumatic brain injury.

    Jane L. Mathias;Jacqui A. Beall;Erin D. Bigler

  • Performance on the Test of Everyday Attention and standard tests of attention following severe traumatic brain injury.

    Andrew J. Bate;Jane L. Mathias;John R. Crawford

  • Cognitive functioning in chronic fatigue syndrome: a meta-analysis.

    S. J. Cockshell;J. L. Mathias

  • Depression following adult, non-penetrating traumatic brain injury: A meta-analysis examining methodological variables and sample characteristics

    A.J. Osborn;J.L. Mathias;A.K. Fairweather-Schmidt

  • Neuropsychological Consequences of Extreme Weight Loss and Dietary Restriction in Patients with Anorexia Nervosa

    Jane L. Mathias;Patricia S. Kent

  • Prevalence of Depression, Anxiety and PTSD in People with Dementia: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

    J K Kuring;J L Mathias;L Ward

  • The Psychological Functioning of Children from Backgrounds of Domestic Violence

    Jane L. Mathias;Peter Mertin;Anne Murray

  • Prospective and declarative memory problems following moderate and severe traumatic brain injury.

    J. L. Mathias;K. M. Mansfield

  • Diffusion tensor imaging changes following mild, moderate and severe adult traumatic brain injury: a meta-analysis.

    Erica J. Wallace;Jane L. Mathias;Lynn Ward

  • Emotional and cognitive sequelae to mild traumatic brain injury.

    Jane L. Mathias;Jasmin L. Coats

  • The depression-executive dysfunction (DED) syndrome and response to antidepressants: a meta-analytic review.

    Skye Nadine McLennan;Jane Mathias

Frequent Co-Authors

Stephen C. Bowden
Stephen C. Bowden University of Melbourne
Erin D. Bigler
Erin D. Bigler University of Utah
Robert Vink
Robert Vink University of South Australia
Greg Brown
Greg Brown California Polytechnic State University
Jeffrey V. Rosenfeld
Jeffrey V. Rosenfeld Monash University
Olivier Salvado
Olivier Salvado Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
Ted Nettelbeck
Ted Nettelbeck University of Adelaide
Kaarin J. Anstey
Kaarin J. Anstey University of New South Wales
Marie T. Banich
Marie T. Banich University of Colorado Boulder
John Robertson Crawford
John Robertson Crawford University of Aberdeen

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

Studying psychology in the USA can open a range of career opportunities—both within psychology and in related fields like social work, counseling, and human services. Many students interested in mental health careers consider online degrees for greater flexibility and affordability, especially when exploring specialized or advanced roles.

If you’re considering a social work pathway, there are many affordable online options across the country. For example, students in the Midwest may want to explore the most affordable social work degree programs in Minneapolis. Those in the South can research affordable social work programs in Mississippi.

For students located on the East Coast, there are cost-effective options available as well, such as the cheapest social work programs in New York City and affordable social work programs in New Jersey.

These programs allow you to build a strong foundation for roles in healthcare, education, community organizations, or private practice. When considering an online degree, compare tuition, accreditation, and local licensure requirements to ensure your choice meets your long-term career goals.

Best Scientists Citing Jane L. Mathias

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles