World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
John P. A. Ioannidis

John P. A. Ioannidis

Award Badge
Best Scientists
2025
Award Badge
Medicine
USA
2026

D-Index & Metrics

Best Scientists

D-Index
229
Citations
351943
World Ranking
95
National Ranking
67

Medicine

D-Index
233
Citations
404413
World Ranking
54
National Ranking
42

John P. A. Ioannidis 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 P. A. Ioannidis 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: 1,234 publications — 97th percentile

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

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

John P. A. Ioannidis 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 P. A. Ioannidis 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: 233 D-Index — 100th percentile

100% 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 States Leader Award
  • 2025 - Research.com Best Scientists Award
  • 2025 - Research.com Medicine in United States Leader Award
  • 2023 - Research.com Medicine in United States Leader Award
  • 2018 - Member of the National Academy of Medicine (NAM)
  • Member of the Association of American Physicians
  • Member of the European Academy of Sciences and Arts
  • Member of the Association of American Physicians
  • Member of the European Academy of Sciences and Arts
  • Member of the Association of American Physicians
  • Member of the European Academy of Sciences and Arts

Overview

John P. A. Ioannidis is affiliated with Stanford University in the United States and has a significant publication record in the field of Medicine. Their research spans multiple subfields, including Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty, Infectious Diseases, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, General Health Professions, and Economics and Econometrics.

Their work frequently addresses key topics such as:

  • Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
  • COVID-19 epidemiological studies
  • Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research
  • Scientometrics and bibliometrics research
  • COVID-19 and healthcare impacts

Ioannidis has published extensively in a range of academic venues. The most common publication sites include:

  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
  • European Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • BMJ
  • JAMA

Recent selected papers illustrate the scope of their research interests and collaborations:

  • "Artificial intelligence versus clinicians: systematic review of design, reporting standards, and claims of deep learning studies" (2020, BMJ)
  • "Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from commonly reported quantiles in meta-analysis" (2020, Data Archiving and Networked Services)
  • "Development of the Instrument to assess the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses (ICEMAN) in randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses" (2020, Canadian Medical Association Journal)
  • "Infection fatality rate of COVID-19 inferred from seroprevalence data" (2020, Bulletin of the World Health Organization)
  • "COVID-19 Antibody Seroprevalence in Santa Clara County, California" (2020, bioRxiv)

Frequent co-authors contributing to many of their studies include:

  • David Moher
  • Cathrine Axfors
  • Steven N. Goodman
  • Despina G. Contopoulos-Ioannidis
  • Lars G. Hemkens

Throughout their career, Ioannidis has been recognized with several memberships in professional academies. These include:

  • Member of the National Academy of Medicine (2018)
  • Member of the European Academy of Sciences and Arts
  • Member of the Association of American Physicians

Best Publications

  • The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration

    Alessandro Liberati;Douglas G. Altman;Jennifer Tetzlaff;Cynthia Mulrow

  • The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration

    Alessandro Liberati;Douglas G Altman;Jennifer Tetzlaff;Cynthia Mulrow

  • Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

    John Pa Ioannidis

  • Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience

    Katherine S. Button;John P. A. Ioannidis;Claire Mokrysz;Brian A. Nosek

  • Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials

    Jonathan A C Sterne;Alex J Sutton;John P A Ioannidis;Norma Terrin

  • The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and ElaborationPRISMA: Explanation and Elaboration

    Alessandro Liberati;Douglas G. Altman;Jennifer Tetzlaff;Cynthia Mulrow

  • The PRISMA Extension Statement for Reporting of Systematic Reviews Incorporating Network Meta-analyses of Health Care Interventions: Checklist and Explanations

    Brian Hutton;Georgia Salanti;Deborah M Caldwell;Anna Chaimani

  • Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 21 antidepressant drugs for the acute treatment of adults with major depressive disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

    Andrea Cipriani;Andrea Cipriani;Toshi A Furukawa;Georgia Salanti;Anna Chaimani;Anna Chaimani;Anna Chaimani

  • Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

    Julian Little;Julian P.T. Higgins;John P.A. Ioannidis;John P.A. Ioannidis;David Moher

  • Transparent Reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): explanation and elaboration.

    Karel G.M. Moons;Douglas G. Altman;Johannes B. Reitsma;John P.A. Ioannidis

  • Genome-wide association studies for complex traits: consensus, uncertainty and challenges

    Mark I. McCarthy;Mark I. McCarthy;Gonçalo R. Abecasis;Lon R. Cardon;Lon R. Cardon;David B. Goldstein

  • A manifesto for reproducible science

    Marcus R. Munafò;Brian A. Nosek;Brian A. Nosek;Dorothy V.M. Bishop;Katherine S. Button

  • Graphical methods and numerical summaries for presenting results from multiple-treatment meta-analysis: an overview and tutorial.

    Georgia Salanti;A.E. Ades;John P.A. Ioannidis;John P.A. Ioannidis;John P.A. Ioannidis

  • Redefine statistical significance

    Daniel J. Benjamin;James O. Berger;Magnus Johannesson;Magnus Johannesson;Brian A. Nosek;Brian A. Nosek

  • Quantitative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews

    Joseph Lau;John P.A. Ioannidis;Christopher H. Schmid

  • Replication validity of genetic association studies.

    John P.A. Ioannidis;Evangelia E. Ntzani;Thomas A. Trikalinos;Despina G. Contopoulos-Ioannidis;Despina G. Contopoulos-Ioannidis

  • Large-scale meta-analysis of genome-wide association data identifies six new risk loci for Parkinson's disease

    Mike A Nalls;Nathan Pankratz;Christina M. Lill;Chuong B. Do

  • Why most discovered true associations are inflated.

    John P. A. Ioannidis

  • Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement.

    John P A Ioannidis;Stephen J W Evans;Peter C Gøtzsche;Robert T O'Neill

  • Erratum: Power failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience (Nature Reviews Neuroscience (2013) 14 (365-376))

    Katherine S. Button;John P.A. Ioannidis;Claire Mokrysz;Brian A. Nosek

Frequent Co-Authors

Evangelos Evangelou
Evangelos Evangelou University of Ioannina
Thomas A Trikalinos
Thomas A Trikalinos Brown University
Joseph Lau
Joseph Lau Chinese University of Hong Kong
Muin J. Khoury
Muin J. Khoury Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Ioanna Tzoulaki
Ioanna Tzoulaki Imperial College London
Julian Little
Julian Little University of Ottawa
André G. Uitterlinden
André G. Uitterlinden Erasmus University Rotterdam
Kari Stefansson
Kari Stefansson deCODE Genetics (Iceland)
Unnur Styrkarsdottir
Unnur Styrkarsdottir deCODE Genetics (Iceland)
Marta Gwinn
Marta Gwinn Emory 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

If you’re considering a future in medicine but prefer flexible educational options, online degrees can open up new healthcare career paths. For registered nurses looking to advance, adn to np bridge programs help nurses move from an Associate Degree in Nursing to a Nurse Practitioner role, often entirely online. These programs are ideal for progressing your clinical career without disrupting your work schedule.

Those interested in wellness and public health may explore an online nutrition degree, which provides foundational knowledge in dietetics, health promotion, and disease prevention. These programs can lead to roles in healthcare, corporate wellness, or community organizations.

For students seeking leadership positions in healthcare, online mha programs can help build business and management expertise necessary for hospital or clinic administration.

Lastly, nurses aiming to earn their Bachelor of Science in Nursing might consider online rn to bsn no clinicals programs, which allow working professionals to complete coursework without additional clinical requirements.

Best Scientists Citing John P. A. Ioannidis

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles