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 140 1644 1520 162 154 583 182657

Jonathan J Deeks publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Jonathan J Deeks between 1959 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Jonathan J Deeks published across 68 years, from 1959 to 2026, averaging 9.6 papers a year. Output peaked at 44 publications in 2021. 19 of the 654 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30 40
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1959 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 44. Peak 44 publications in 2021. 1959: 1 publication 1960: 0 publications 1961: 0 publications 1962: 0 publications 1963: 0 publications 1964: 0 publications 1965: 0 publications 1966: 0 publications 1967: 0 publications 1968: 0 publications 1969: 0 publications 1970: 0 publications 1971: 0 publications 1972: 0 publications 1973: 0 publications 1974: 0 publications 1975: 0 publications 1976: 0 publications 1977: 0 publications 1978: 0 publications 1979: 0 publications 1980: 0 publications 1981: 0 publications 1982: 0 publications 1983: 0 publications 1984: 0 publications 1985: 0 publications 1986: 0 publications 1987: 0 publications 1988: 0 publications 1989: 0 publications 1990: 0 publications 1991: 2 publications 1992: 4 publications 1993: 5 publications 1994: 5 publications 1995: 5 publications 1996: 5 publications 1997: 4 publications 1998: 8 publications 1999: 17 publications 2000: 11 publications 2001: 24 publications 2002: 12 publications 2003: 8 publications 2004: 16 publications 2005: 24 publications 2006: 13 publications 2007: 16 publications 2008: 26 publications 2009: 10 publications 2010: 11 publications 2011: 17 publications 2012: 37 publications 2013: 27 publications 2014: 12 publications 2015: 23 publications 2016: 34 publications 2017: 33 publications 2018: 37 publications 2019: 39 publications 2020: 42 publications 2021: 44 publications 2022: 22 publications 2023: 21 publications 2024: 20 publications 2025: 18 publications 2026: 1 publication
1959 2026

654 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Jonathan J Deeks: publications per year, 1959 to 2026
Year Publications
1959 1
1960 0
1961 0
1962 0
1963 0
1964 0
1965 0
1966 0
1967 0
1968 0
1969 0
1970 0
1971 0
1972 0
1973 0
1974 0
1975 0
1976 0
1977 0
1978 0
1979 0
1980 0
1981 0
1982 0
1983 0
1984 0
1985 0
1986 0
1987 0
1988 0
1989 0
1990 0
1991 2
1992 4
1993 5
1994 5
1995 5
1996 5
1997 4
1998 8
1999 17
2000 11
2001 24
2002 12
2003 8
2004 16
2005 24
2006 13
2007 16
2008 26
2009 10
2010 11
2011 17
2012 37
2013 27
2014 12
2015 23
2016 34
2017 33
2018 37
2019 39
2020 42
2021 44
2022 22
2023 21
2024 20
2025 18
2026 1
Total 654
Download as CSV

Jonathan J Deeks 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 Jonathan J Deeks 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, 581–600 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: 583 publications — 70th percentile

70% 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
581–600 509 583
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
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

Jonathan J Deeks 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 Jonathan J Deeks 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, 140–141 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: 140 D-Index — 92nd percentile

92% 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
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
140–141 134 140
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

Jonathan J Deeks is affiliated with the University of Birmingham in the United Kingdom, specializing primarily in the field of Medicine. Their research contributions span several subfields including Infectious Diseases, Epidemiology, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Surgery, and Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty.

The scientist's work includes extensive publications focusing on key topics such as SARS-CoV-2 detection and testing, SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research, COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies, meta-analysis and systematic reviews, health systems and economic evaluations, quality of life, biosensors and analytical detection, and COVID-19 diagnosis using artificial intelligence.

Notable recent papers authored or co-authored by Jonathan J Deeks include:

  • Rapid, point-of-care antigen and molecular-based tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, 2020, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
  • Reporting guidelines for clinical trial reports for interventions involving artificial intelligence: the CONSORT-AI extension, 2020, Nature Medicine
  • FibroScan-AST (FAST) score for the non-invasive identification of patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis with significant activity and fibrosis: a prospective derivation and global validation study, 2020, The Lancet. Gastroenterology & Hepatology
  • Rapid, point-of-care antigen tests for diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, 2021, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
  • Signs and symptoms to determine if a patient presenting in primary care or hospital outpatient settings has COVID-19 disease, 2020, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Frequent collaborators include Yemisi Takwoingi, Jacqueline Dinnes, Clare Davenport, Mariska Leeflang, and René Spijker. These co-authors have contributed to numerous joint research projects and publications alongside Jonathan J Deeks.

Jonathan J Deeks has published primarily in venues such as the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, BMJ, bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), BMJ Open, and Health Technology Assessment. Among these, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews stands out as the most frequent forum, comprising the majority of their scholarly output.

Best Publications

  • Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses

    Julian P T Higgins;Simon G Thompson;Jonathan J Deeks;Douglas G Altman

  • ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions.

    Jonathan A. C. Sterne;Miguel A Hernan;Barnaby C Reeves;Jelena Savovic;Jelena Savovic

  • Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement

    D Moher;A Liberati;J Tetzlaff;D G Altman

  • QUADAS-2: A Revised Tool for the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies

    Penny F. Whiting;Anne W.S. Rutjes;Marie E. Westwood;Susan Mallett

  • 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

  • Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies.

    J J Deeks;J Dinnes;R D'Amico;A J Sowden

  • Chapter 9: Analysing Data and Undertaking Meta-Analyses

    J J Deeks;J P Higgins;D G Altman

  • MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis

    Veeru Kasivisvanathan;Antti S. Rannikko;Marcelo Borghi;Valeria Panebianco

  • The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed.

    Jonathan J. Deeks;Petra Macaskill;Les Irwig

  • Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses.

    Richard D Riley;Julian P T Higgins;Jonathan J Deeks

  • Preferred Reporting Items for a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Diagnostic Test Accuracy Studies The PRISMA-DTA Statement

    Matthew D.F. McInnes;David Moher;Brett D. Thombs;Brett D. Thombs;Trevor A. McGrath

  • Diagnostic tests 4: likelihood ratios

    Jonathan J Deeks;Douglas G Altman

  • Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests

    Jonathan J Deeks

  • Statistical Methods for Examining Heterogeneity and Combining Results from Several Studies in Meta‐Analysis

    Jonathan J Deeks;Douglas G Altman;Michael J Bradburn

  • Interpreting results and drawing conclusions

    Holger J. Schünemann;Gunn E. Vist;Julian P.T. Higgins;Nancy Santesso

  • Systematic reviews in health care: Systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests.

    Jonathan J Deeks

  • Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomized, controlled trials.

    Jelena Savović;Hayley E Jones;Douglas G Altman;Ross J Harris

  • Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses

    Jonathan J Deeks;Julian Pt Higgins;Douglas G Altman

  • Influence of reported study design characteristics on intervention effect estimates from randomised controlled trials: combined analysis of meta-epidemiological studies

    J Savović;HE Jones;DG Altman;RJ Harris

  • Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy

    Mariska M.G. Leeflang;Jonathan J. Deeks;Constantine Gatsonis;Patrick M.M. Bossuyt

Frequent Co-Authors

Douglas G. Altman
Douglas G. Altman University of Oxford
Ajit Lalvani
Ajit Lalvani Imperial College London
Hywel C. Williams
Hywel C. Williams University of Nottingham
Paul Glasziou
Paul Glasziou Bond University
Rafael Perera
Rafael Perera University of Oxford
Julian P T Higgins
Julian P T Higgins University of Bristol
Luke Vale
Luke Vale Newcastle University
Mandy Ryan
Mandy Ryan University of Aberdeen
Jonathan A C Sterne
Jonathan A C Sterne University of Bristol
Wiebke Arlt
Wiebke Arlt University of Birmingham

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 career in medicine but are interested in alternative or supportive roles, there are diverse online degrees and career pathways you can explore. For example, professionals seeking administrative positions may benefit from attending medical billing and coding schools online, which provide flexible learning options and often financial aid.

For those focused on patient care but who want a less traditional path, there are also nursing schools that don't require teas or hesi, reducing barriers to entry for aspiring nurses.

If speed to a healthcare leadership role is a factor, you might consider accelerated healthcare programs that can quickly equip you with essential management and leadership expertise.

Experienced nurses looking to advance may find asn to np programs especially beneficial for progressing toward a nurse practitioner role. Exploring these online options can open up a variety of fulfilling career pathways in medicine and healthcare.

Best Scientists Citing Jonathan J Deeks

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles