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 45 6601 6144 388 378 140 10631

Jill M. Newby publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Jill M. Newby between 2010 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Jill M. Newby published across 17 years, from 2010 to 2026, averaging 12.8 papers a year. Output peaked at 33 publications in 2021. 30 of the 217 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2010 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 33. Peak 33 publications in 2021. 2010: 1 publication 2011: 4 publications 2012: 3 publications 2013: 2 publications 2014: 4 publications 2015: 8 publications 2016: 9 publications 2017: 12 publications 2018: 15 publications 2019: 6 publications 2020: 22 publications 2021: 33 publications 2022: 23 publications 2023: 17 publications 2024: 28 publications 2025: 22 publications 2026: 8 publications
2010 2026

217 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Jill M. Newby: publications per year, 2010 to 2026
Year Publications
2010 1
2011 4
2012 3
2013 2
2014 4
2015 8
2016 9
2017 12
2018 15
2019 6
2020 22
2021 33
2022 23
2023 17
2024 28
2025 22
2026 8
Total 217
Download as CSV

Jill M. Newby publications per year - data summary

  • Jill M. Newby, a Psychology scholar from University of New South Wales, has 217 publications recorded across 17 years, from 2010 to 2026.
  • The oldest publication on record dates to 2010 and the most recent to 2026.
  • The most productive year is 2021, with 33 publications.
  • The least productive year with any output is 2010, with 1 publication.
  • The rate of publication averages 12.8 papers per year over the whole span, or 12.8 per year counting only the 17 years with at least one publication.
  • The last 5 years on the chart (2022-2026) hold 98 publications, 45% of the career total.
  • Split into equal eras - 2010-2015: 22 publications (3.7 per year); 2016-2021: 97 publications (16.2 per year); 2022-2026: 98 publications (19.6 per year).
  • Comparing the opening and closing eras, the overall trend of publication is rising.

Jill M. Newby 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 Jill M. Newby 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, 131–140 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: 140 publications — 44th percentile

44% 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
121–130 670
131–140 644 140
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

Jill M. Newby publication distribution in Psychology in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the publication count of all 11,416 Psychology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 69 ranges running from 31–40 to 705+ publications.
  • Jill M. Newby, a Psychology scholar from University of New South Wales, records 140 publications - the 44th percentile of the discipline.
  • 44% of ranked Psychology scientists score the same or lower than Jill M. Newby, and about 56% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 151–160 publications range, and Jill M. Newby ranks below the median.
  • The most crowded range is 101–110 publications, holding 736 scientists (6% of the field).
  • 72% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 201–210 publications), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 705 publications or more, 100 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

Jill M. Newby 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 Jill M. Newby 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, 44–45 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: 45 D-Index — 43rd percentile

43% 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 45
46–47 495
48–49 487
50–51 445
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

Jill M. Newby D-index placement in Psychology in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the discipline H-index (D-index) of all 11,416 Psychology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 58 ranges running from 30–31 to 144+ D-Index.
  • Jill M. Newby, a Psychology scholar from University of New South Wales, records 45 D-Index - the 43rd percentile of the discipline.
  • 43% of ranked Psychology scientists score the same or lower than Jill M. Newby, and about 57% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 48–49 D-Index range, and Jill M. Newby ranks below the median.
  • The most crowded range is 32–33 D-Index, holding 702 scientists (6% of the field).
  • 68% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 58–59 D-Index), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more, 98 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

Overview

Jill M. Newby is affiliated with the University of New South Wales in Australia. Their research focuses primarily on psychology and medicine, with significant contributions to clinical psychology, experimental and cognitive psychology, and applied psychology. Additional research interests include general health professions and public health, environmental, and occupational health.

The main topics covered in their work include digital mental health interventions, mental health research topics, and the impact of COVID-19 on mental health. Their studies also address anxiety, depression, psychometrics, treatment, and cognitive processes, as well as child and adolescent psychosocial and emotional development. Further attention is given to mental health treatment and access and the impact of technology on adolescents.

Frequent coauthors in their research collaborations are Helen Christensen, Aliza Werner-Seidler, Alison Mahoney, Michelle L. Moulds, and Alexis E. Whitton.

Frequently publishing venues include:

  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • Internet Interventions
  • Journal of Affective Disorders
  • Journal of Anxiety Disorders
  • Aesthetic Surgery Journal

Significant recent papers authored or coauthored by Jill M. Newby include:

  • Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression, 2021, JAMA Psychiatry
  • Acute mental health responses during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia, 2020, PLoS ONE
  • Public Perceptions of COVID-19 in Australia: Perceived Risk, Knowledge, Health-Protective Behaviors, and Vaccine Intentions, 2020, Frontiers in Psychology
  • School-based depression and anxiety prevention programs: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis, 2021, Clinical Psychology Review
  • Dismantling, optimising, and personalising internet cognitive behavioural therapy for depression: a systematic review and component network meta-analysis using individual participant data, 2021, The Lancet Psychiatry

Best Publications

  • Computer therapy for the anxiety and depression disorders is effective, acceptable and practical health care: An updated meta-analysis

    G. Andrews;A. Basu;P. Cuijpers;M.G. Craske

  • School-based depression and anxiety prevention programs for young people: A systematic review and meta-analysis

    Aliza Werner-Seidler;Yael Perry;Alison L. Calear;Jill M. Newby

  • Internet-Based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression: A Systematic Review and Individual Patient Data Network Meta-analysis.

    Eirini Karyotaki;Eirini Karyotaki;Eirini Karyotaki;Orestis Efthimiou;Orestis Efthimiou;Clara Miguel;Clara Miguel;Frederic Maas Genannt Bermpohl

  • Systematic review and meta-analysis of transdiagnostic psychological treatments for anxiety and depressive disorders in adulthood.

    Jill M. Newby;Anna McKinnon;Willem Kuyken;Simon Gilbody

  • Acute mental health responses during the COVID-19 pandemic in Australia.

    Jill M. Newby;Kathleen O’Moore;Samantha Tang;Helen Christensen

  • Physical activity in the treatment of Post-traumatic stress disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Simon Rosenbaum;Simon Rosenbaum;Davy Vancampfort;Zachary Steel;Zachary Steel;Jill Newby

  • Do guided internet-based interventions result in clinically relevant changes for patients with depression? An individual participant data meta-analysis.

    Eirini Karyotaki;David Daniel Ebert;Liesje Donkin;Heleen Riper

  • Health Anxiety in Australia: Prevalence, Comorbidity, Disability and Service Use

    Matthew Sunderland;Jill M. Newby;Gavin Andrews

  • Public Perceptions of COVID-19 in Australia: Perceived Risk, Knowledge, Health-Protective Behaviors, and Vaccine Intentions

    Kate Faasse;Jill Newby;Jill Newby

  • School-based depression and anxiety prevention programs: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Aliza Werner-Seidler;Samantha Spanos;Alison L. Calear;Yael Perry

  • The impact of COVID-19 on the lives and mental health of Australian adolescents.

    Sophie H Li;Joanne R Beames;Jill M Newby;Jill M Newby;Kate Maston

  • Dismantling, optimising, and personalising internet cognitive behavioural therapy for depression: a systematic review and component network meta-analysis using individual participant data.

    Toshi A. Furukawa;Aya Suganuma;Edoardo G. Ostinelli;Gerhard Andersson;Gerhard Andersson

  • Treatment-as-usual (TAU) is anything but usual: a meta-analysis of CBT versus TAU for anxiety and depression.

    Sarah E. Watts;Adrienne Turnell;Natalie Kladnitski;Jill M. Newby

  • Internet cognitive behavioural therapy for mixed anxiety and depression: a randomized controlled trial and evidence of effectiveness in primary care.

    J. M. Newby;A. Mackenzie;A. D. Williams;K. McIntyre

  • Transdiagnostic computerised cognitive behavioural therapy for depression and anxiety: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

    Jill M. Newby;Conal Twomey;Susan Shi Yuan Li;Gavin Andrews

  • Does Internet-based guided-self-help for depression cause harm? An individual participant data meta-analysis on deterioration rates and its moderators in randomized controlled trials.

    D. D. Ebert;L. Donkin;Gerhard Andersson;G. Andrews

  • DSM-5 illness anxiety disorder and somatic symptom disorder: Comorbidity, correlates, and overlap with DSM-IV hypochondriasis

    Jill M Newby;Jill M Newby;Megan J Hobbs;Alison E J Mahoney;Shiu Kelvin Wong

  • A randomized controlled trial of 'MUMentum Pregnancy': Internet-delivered cognitive behavioral therapy program for antenatal anxiety and depression.

    Siobhan A. Loughnan;Siobhan A. Loughnan;Amanda Sie;Megan J. Hobbs;Amy E. Joubert

  • Internet Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Depression in Older Adults With Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

    Kathleen A O'moore;Jill M Newby;Gavin Andrews;David J Hunter

  • Effectiveness of transdiagnostic Internet cognitive behavioural treatment for mixed anxiety and depression in primary care.

    Jill M. Newby;Louise Mewton;Alishia D. Williams;Gavin Andrews

  • Web-Based Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Depression in People With Diabetes Mellitus: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

    Jill Newby;Lisa Robins;Kay Wilhelm;Jessica Smith

Frequent Co-Authors

Gavin Andrews
Gavin Andrews University of New South Wales
Alishia D. Williams
Alishia D. Williams University of New South Wales
Michelle L. Moulds
Michelle L. Moulds University of New South Wales
Helen Christensen
Helen Christensen University of New South Wales
Zachary Steel
Zachary Steel University of New South Wales
Aliza Werner-Seidler
Aliza Werner-Seidler University of New South Wales
Colette R. Hirsch
Colette R. Hirsch King's College London
Gerhard Andersson
Gerhard Andersson Linköping University
Pim Cuijpers
Pim Cuijpers Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Eirini Karyotaki
Eirini Karyotaki Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

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 online degrees in psychology can open doors to a variety of rewarding career pathways. One popular direction is substance abuse counseling, a field with growing demand across the United States. Each city and state has unique certification requirements and educational standards, so staying informed is essential.

For instance, if you’re interested in working in California, you should review the Chula Vista substance abuse counselor certification requirements. Those aiming for a role in Ohio can learn more about the substance abuse counselor requirements in Cincinnati or discover how to become a substance abuse counselor in Cleveland. If Colorado is your goal, explore the steps for becoming a substance abuse counselor in Colorado Springs.

Whether you choose clinical psychology or a related social service track, understanding the local regulations and licensure processes will help you prepare for a successful career. Online psychology degrees offer flexibility and a strong starting point for entering these vital roles.

Best Scientists Citing Jill M. Newby

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles