World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
140
Citations
182657
World Ranking
1644
National Ranking
162

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.

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: 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.

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.

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: 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.

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