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
Medicine 103 7375 6929 716 682 790 38293

John Strang publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by John Strang between 1974 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. John Strang published across 52 years, from 1974 to 2025, averaging 16.4 papers a year. Output peaked at 42 publications in 1999. 38 of the 853 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30 40
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1974 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 42. Peak 42 publications in 1999. 1974: 1 publication 1975: 0 publications 1976: 0 publications 1977: 0 publications 1978: 0 publications 1979: 0 publications 1980: 0 publications 1981: 2 publications 1982: 7 publications 1983: 2 publications 1984: 6 publications 1985: 7 publications 1986: 4 publications 1987: 7 publications 1988: 12 publications 1989: 13 publications 1990: 19 publications 1991: 17 publications 1992: 18 publications 1993: 17 publications 1994: 19 publications 1995: 8 publications 1996: 17 publications 1997: 31 publications 1998: 33 publications 1999: 42 publications 2000: 29 publications 2001: 28 publications 2002: 28 publications 2003: 25 publications 2004: 22 publications 2005: 16 publications 2006: 15 publications 2007: 18 publications 2008: 9 publications 2009: 13 publications 2010: 15 publications 2011: 12 publications 2012: 13 publications 2013: 15 publications 2014: 14 publications 2015: 29 publications 2016: 30 publications 2017: 41 publications 2018: 39 publications 2019: 32 publications 2020: 30 publications 2021: 30 publications 2022: 17 publications 2023: 13 publications 2024: 9 publications 2025: 29 publications
1974 2025

853 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
John Strang: publications per year, 1974 to 2025
Year Publications
1974 1
1975 0
1976 0
1977 0
1978 0
1979 0
1980 0
1981 2
1982 7
1983 2
1984 6
1985 7
1986 4
1987 7
1988 12
1989 13
1990 19
1991 17
1992 18
1993 17
1994 19
1995 8
1996 17
1997 31
1998 33
1999 42
2000 29
2001 28
2002 28
2003 25
2004 22
2005 16
2006 15
2007 18
2008 9
2009 13
2010 15
2011 12
2012 13
2013 15
2014 14
2015 29
2016 30
2017 41
2018 39
2019 32
2020 30
2021 30
2022 17
2023 13
2024 9
2025 29
Total 853
Download as CSV

John Strang 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 Strang sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600 800
Bar chart with 86 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 101–120 to 1,796+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 922. Most scientists, 922, have 341–360 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 781–800 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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: 610 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
101–120 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 790 publications — 87th percentile

87% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
101–120 5
121–140 26
141–160 73
161–180 155
181–200 230
201–220 363
221–240 487
241–260 545
261–280 722
281–300 768
301–320 834
321–340 895
341–360 922
361–380 838
381–400 861
401–420 918
421–440 806
441–460 771
461–480 751
481–500 713
501–520 617
521–540 610
541–560 537
561–580 504
581–600 509
601–620 396
621–640 386
641–660 371
661–680 340
681–700 336
701–720 307
721–740 259
741–760 230
761–780 228
781–800 217 790
801–820 204
821–840 186
841–860 177
861–880 155
881–900 139
901–920 145
921–940 116
941–960 133
961–980 91
981–1,000 96
1,001–1,020 77
1,021–1,040 70
1,041–1,060 63
1,061–1,080 77
1,081–1,100 49
1,101–1,120 54
1,121–1,140 49
1,141–1,160 51
1,161–1,180 35
1,181–1,200 39
1,201–1,220 26
1,221–1,240 37
1,241–1,260 36
1,261–1,280 27
1,281–1,300 32
1,301–1,320 28
1,321–1,340 17
1,341–1,360 30
1,361–1,380 28
1,381–1,400 17
1,401–1,420 21
1,421–1,440 15
1,441–1,460 12
1,461–1,480 12
1,481–1,500 18
1,501–1,520 14
1,521–1,540 17
1,541–1,560 15
1,561–1,580 6
1,581–1,600 2
1,601–1,620 12
1,621–1,640 11
1,641–1,660 8
1,661–1,680 5
1,681–1,700 5
1,701–1,720 10
1,721–1,740 12
1,741–1,760 14
1,761–1,780 6
1,781–1,795 5
1,796+ 100
Download as CSV

John Strang 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 Strang sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
250 500 750 1,000
Bar chart with 75 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 70–71 to 217+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 1,027. Most scientists, 1,027, have 82–83 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 102–103 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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: 399 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
70–71 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 103 D-Index — 65th percentile

65% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
70–71 226
72–73 391
74–75 574
76–77 730
78–79 891
80–81 972
82–83 1,027
84–85 1,003
86–87 960
88–89 970
90–91 922
92–93 839
94–95 808
96–97 779
98–99 668
100–101 611
102–103 630 103
104–105 513
106–107 541
108–109 445
110–111 429
112–113 399
114–115 393
116–117 318
118–119 302
120–121 287
122–123 255
124–125 256
126–127 252
128–129 230
130–131 179
132–133 168
134–135 163
136–137 159
138–139 134
140–141 134
142–143 118
144–145 109
146–147 106
148–149 74
150–151 79
152–153 80
154–155 87
156–157 57
158–159 74
160–161 69
162–163 60
164–165 53
166–167 39
168–169 42
170–171 32
172–173 39
174–175 40
176–177 28
178–179 19
180–181 23
182–183 31
184–185 18
186–187 20
188–189 22
190–191 13
192–193 21
194–195 12
196–197 12
198–199 14
200–201 15
202–203 13
204–205 10
206–207 8
208–209 4
210–211 12
212–213 11
214–215 10
216 4
217+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

John Strang is affiliated with King's College London in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily focuses on medicine, with a significant concentration on epidemiology, public health, environmental and occupational health, general health professions, anesthesiology and pain medicine, and emergency medicine.

The core themes of their work cover a range of topics including opioid use disorder treatment, substance abuse treatment and outcomes, HIV related to drug use and sexual risk, pain management and opioid use, homelessness and social issues, digital mental health interventions, and forensic toxicology and drug analysis.

They have contributed extensively to academic literature, with notable publications such as:

  • Opioid use disorder, 2020, Nature Reviews Disease Primers
  • Brief Report: Increased Addictive Internet and Substance Use Behavior During the COVID-19 Pandemic in China, 2020, American Journal on Addictions
  • Internet Addiction Increases in the General Population During COVID-19: Evidence From China, 2021, American Journal on Addictions
  • Editorial: Challenges to Opioid Use Disorders During COVID-19, 2020, American Journal on Addictions
  • Global opioid agonist treatment: a review of clinical practices by country, 2020, Addiction

They frequently publish in the following venues:

  • Addiction
  • International Journal of Drug Policy
  • Drug and Alcohol Review
  • American Journal on Addictions
  • Drug and Alcohol Dependence

Their collaborative work involves several frequent coauthors, including:

  • Joanne Neale
  • Nicola Metrebian
  • Stephen Parkin
  • Basak Tas
  • Nicola J. Kalk

Best Publications

  • The Severity of Dependence Scale (SDS): psychometric properties of the SDS in English and Australian samples of heroin, cocaine and amphetamine users.

    Michael Gossop;Shane Darke;Paul Griffiths;Julie Hando

  • The Maudsley Addiction Profile (MAP):A brief instrument for assessing treatment outcome.

    John Marsden;Michael Gossop;Duncan Stewart;David Best

  • Understanding reasons for drug use amongst young people: a functional perspective

    Annabel Boys;John Marsden;John Strang

  • The efficacy of single-session motivational interviewing in reducing drug consumption and perceptions of drug-related risk and harm among young people: results from a multi-site cluster randomized trial.

    Jim McCambridge;John Strang

  • Opioid use disorder.

    John Strang;John Strang;Nora D. Volkow;Louisa Degenhardt;Matthew Hickman

  • Drug Policy and the Public Good

    Thomas F. Babor;Jonathan P. Caulkins;Griffith Edwards;Benedikt Fischer

  • Fortnightly Review: Methadone maintenance treatment in opiate dependence: a review

    M Farrell;J Ward;R Mattick;W Hall

  • Prevention, early intervention, harm reduction, and treatment of substance use in young people

    Emily Stockings;Wayne D Hall;Wayne D Hall;Michael Lynskey;Katherine I Morley

  • Global, regional, and country-level coverage of interventions to prevent and manage HIV and hepatitis C among people who inject drugs: a systematic review

    Sarah Larney;Amy Peacock;Janni Leung;Samantha Colledge

  • Reaching hidden populations of drug users by privileged access interviewers: methodological and practical issues

    Peter Griffiths;Michael Gossop;B Powis;John Strang

  • Are take-home naloxone programmes effective? Systematic review utilizing application of the Bradford Hill criteria.

    Rebecca McDonald;John Strang

  • Severity of dependence and route of administration of heroin, cocaine and amphetamines

    Michael Gossop;Paul Griffiths;Beverly Powis;John Strang

  • Depression and Anxiety Symptoms in Children and Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorders without Intellectual Disability.

    John F. Strang;Lauren Kenworthy;Peter Daniolos;Laura Case

  • Loss of tolerance and overdose mortality after inpatient opiate detoxification: follow up study

    John Strang;Jim McCambridge;David Best;Tracy Beswick

  • Risk of death during and after opiate substitution treatment in primary care: prospective observational study in UK General Practice Research Database

    Rosie Cornish;John Macleod;John Strang;Peter Vickerman;Peter Vickerman

  • Drug policy and the public good: evidence for effective interventions

    John Strang;Thomas Babor;Jonathan Caulkins;Jonathan Caulkins;Benedikt Fischer;Benedikt Fischer

  • Brief, Personality-Targeted Coping Skills Interventions and Survival as a Non-Drug User Over a 2-Year Period During Adolescence

    Patricia J. Conrod;Natalie Castellanos-Ryan;John Strang

  • Randomized controlled effectiveness trial of executive function intervention for children on the autism spectrum.

    Lauren Kenworthy;Lauren Kenworthy;Laura Gutermuth Anthony;Laura Gutermuth Anthony;Daniel Q. Naiman;Lynn Cannon

  • Estimating the burden of disease attributable to injecting drug use as a risk factor for HIV, hepatitis C, and hepatitis B: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013

    Louisa Degenhardt;Fiona Charlson;Fiona Charlson;Jeff Stanaway;Sarah Larney

Frequent Co-Authors

Michael Gossop
Michael Gossop King's College London
John Marsden
John Marsden King's College London
David Best
David Best University of Derby
Michael Farrell
Michael Farrell University of New South Wales
Joanne Neale
Joanne Neale King's College London
Jim McCambridge
Jim McCambridge University of York
Nicholas Lintzeris
Nicholas Lintzeris University of Sydney
Benedikt Fischer
Benedikt Fischer University of Auckland
Robin Room
Robin Room La Trobe University
David R. Foxcroft
David R. Foxcroft Oxford Brookes 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

Interested in alternative pathways or advancing your medical career? Online degrees now make it easier for healthcare professionals to specialize or upskill without pausing their careers. From fast-track nursing to advanced practice degrees, there are a variety of flexible options to explore.

Those looking for the fastest route to higher nursing roles might consider a 1 year dnp program online. These accelerated doctoral programs are designed for experienced nurses aiming to move quickly into top clinical and leadership positions.

Flexible and dnp online programs also cater to working professionals by offering a more achievable pathway to a Doctor of Nursing Practice degree.

If you're starting your healthcare journey, a fast track lpn programs can help you become a Licensed Practical Nurse in less time, with fully online and hybrid options.

Specializing in mental health care? The fastest psych np program pathways are ideal for RNs seeking to make an impact in psychiatric and mental health sectors sooner.

Best Scientists Citing John Strang

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles