World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Award Badge
Best Scientists
2025
Award Badge
Medicine
UK
2026

D-Index & Metrics

Best Scientists

D-Index
166
Citations
163032
World Ranking
989
National Ranking
99

Medicine

D-Index
168
Citations
175974
World Ranking
549
National Ranking
66

John Danesh 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 John Danesh 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: 413 publications — 41st percentile

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

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

John Danesh 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 John Danesh 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: 168 D-Index — 97th percentile

97% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2026 - Research.com Medicine in United Kingdom Leader Award
  • 2025 - Research.com Best Scientists Award
  • 2025 - Research.com Medicine in United Kingdom Leader Award

Overview

John Danesh is affiliated with the University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily spans the fields of Medicine and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, with substantial contributions in Genetics, Molecular Biology, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Physiology, and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health.

Their main research topics include Genetic Associations and Epidemiology, Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks, Telomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence, Nutritional Studies and Diet, Genomics and Rare Diseases, Epigenetics and DNA Methylation, and Lipid metabolism and disorders.

John Danesh has authored numerous papers, with recent notable publications as follows:

  • A genomic mutational constraint map using variation in 76,156 human genomes (2023, Nature)
  • Discovery of 318 new risk loci for type 2 diabetes and related vascular outcomes among 1.4 million participants in a multi-ancestry meta-analysis (2020, Nature Genetics)
  • Phenome-wide Mendelian randomization mapping the influence of the plasma proteome on complex diseases (2020, Nature Genetics)
  • Genomic and drug target evaluation of 90 cardiovascular proteins in 30,931 individuals (2020, Nature Metabolism)
  • The Polygenic and Monogenic Basis of Blood Traits and Diseases (2020, Cell)

Their research has been published in a range of journals and venues, with frequent contributions to:

  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • Kidney International
  • Nature Communications
  • Nature Genetics
  • UNC Libraries

John Danesh collaborates regularly with several co-authors, including:

  • Adam S. Butterworth
  • Emanuele Di Angelantonio
  • Angela Wood
  • David J. Roberts
  • Willem H. Ouwehand

This profile reflects the scientist's diverse and multidisciplinary research activities, ranging from high-impact genetics studies to comprehensive epidemiological investigations and molecular biology inquiries within clinical and public health contexts.

Best Publications

  • UK biobank: an open access resource for identifying the causes of a wide range of complex diseases of middle and old age

    Cathie Sudlow;John Edward Gallacher;Naomi Allen;Valerie Beral

  • Analysis of protein-coding genetic variation in 60,706 humans

    Monkol Lek;Konrad J. Karczewski;Konrad J. Karczewski;Eric V. Minikel;Eric V. Minikel;Kaitlin E. Samocha

  • Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies

    N Sarwar;P Gao;Seshasai Srk.

  • C-Reactive Protein and Other Circulating Markers of Inflammation in the Prediction of Coronary Heart Disease

    John Danesh;Jeremy G Wheeler;Gideon M Hirschfield;Shinichi Eda

  • Major lipids, apolipoproteins, and risk of vascular disease

    E Di Angelantonio;N Sarwar;P Perry

  • Discovery and refinement of loci associated with lipid levels

    Cristen J. Willer;Ellen M. Schmidt;Sebanti Sengupta;Gina M. Peloso;Gina M. Peloso;Gina M. Peloso

  • Serious mental disorder in 23 000 prisoners: a systematic review of 62 surveys

    Seena Fazel;John Danesh

  • Prevalence of serious mental disorder in 7000 refugees resettled in western countries: a systematic review.

    Mina Fazel;Jeremy Wheeler;John Danesh

  • Association of fibrinogen, C-reactive protein, albumin, or leukocyte count with coronary heart disease: meta-analyses of prospective studies.

    John Danesh;Rory Collins;Paul Appleby;Richard Peto

  • C-reactive protein concentration and risk of coronary heart disease, stroke, and mortality: an individual participant meta-analysis.

    S Kaptoge;E Di Angelantonio;G Lowe

  • Diabetes mellitus, fasting glucose, and risk of cause-specific death.

    Sreenivasa Rao Kondapally Seshasai;Stephen Kaptoge;Alexander Thompson;Emanuele Di Angelantonio

  • Body-mass index and all-cause mortality: individual-participant-data meta-analysis of 239 prospective studies in four continents

    Emanuele Di Angelantonio;Shilpa N Bhupathiraju;David Wormser;Pei Gao;Pei Gao

  • Plasma HDL cholesterol and risk of myocardial infarction: A mendelian randomisation study

    Benjamin F. Voight;Benjamin F. Voight;Benjamin F. Voight;Gina M. Peloso;Gina M. Peloso;Marju Orho-Melander;Ruth Frikke-Schmidt

  • Low grade inflammation and coronary heart disease: prospective study and updated meta-analyses

    John Danesh;Peter Whincup;Mary Walker;Lucy Lennon

  • A comprehensive 1000 Genomes–based genome-wide association meta-analysis of coronary artery disease

    M Nikpay;A Goel;Won H-H.;L M Hall

  • Genetic variants in novel pathways influence blood pressure and cardiovascular disease risk

    Georg B. Ehret;Georg B. Ehret;Georg B. Ehret;Patricia B. Munroe;Kenneth M. Rice;Murielle Bochud

  • Defining the role of common variation in the genomic and biological architecture of adult human height

    Andrew R. Wood;Tonu Esko;Jian Yang;Sailaja Vedantam

  • Large-scale association analysis provides insights into the genetic architecture and pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes

    Andrew P Morris;Benjamin F Voight;Benjamin F Voight;Tanya M Teslovich;Teresa Ferreira

  • Clonal Hematopoiesis and risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

    Siddhartha Jaiswal;Pradeep Natarajan;Pradeep Natarajan;Alexander J. Silver;Christopher J. Gibson

  • Triglycerides and the Risk of Coronary Heart Disease 10 158 Incident Cases Among 262 525 Participants in 29 Western Prospective Studies

    Nadeem Sarwar;John Danesh;Gudny Eiriksdottir;Gunnar Sigurdsson

Frequent Co-Authors

Adam S. Butterworth
Adam S. Butterworth University of Cambridge
Danish Saleheen
Danish Saleheen Columbia University
Emanuele Di Angelantonio
Emanuele Di Angelantonio University of Cambridge
Nilesh J. Samani
Nilesh J. Samani University of Leicester
Sekar Kathiresan
Sekar Kathiresan Harvard University
Panos Deloukas
Panos Deloukas Queen Mary University of London
Nicholas J. Wareham
Nicholas J. Wareham University of Cambridge
Markus Perola
Markus Perola Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare
Jaspal S. Kooner
Jaspal S. Kooner Imperial College London
John C. Chambers
John C. Chambers Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust

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

Pursuing a medical career in the USA can open doors to a wide range of online degree options tailored for healthcare professionals. For registered nurses seeking career advancement, adn to np programs online and bridge programs allow RNs to achieve advanced credentials, such as Nurse Practitioner, without stepping away from their jobs.

Beyond nursing, nutrition is an emerging field in health sciences. Enrolling in an online degree nutrition program provides specialized skills to address health and wellness through food science, supporting diverse roles in clinical and community health settings.

Aspiring healthcare leaders can consider programs accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Management Education. This ensures quality and recognition for those earning a Master of Healthcare Administration from a cahme-accredited online school.

For nurses looking for flexibility, several rn bsn online programs no clinicals are now available. These programs let working professionals advance their education without inconvenient clinical requirements, making progress toward leadership and specialized nursing roles easier than ever.

Best Scientists Citing John Danesh

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles