World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
85
Citations
21484
World Ranking
14778
National Ranking
1360

Judith E. Adams 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 Judith E. Adams 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: 340 publications — 25th percentile

25% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Judith E. Adams 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 Judith E. Adams 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: 85 D-Index — 29th percentile

29% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Judith E. Adams was affiliated with the University of Manchester in the United Kingdom. Their research spanned topics related to health management, digital mental health, mobile health applications, and social issues within urban environments.

Their published works include:

  • Understanding Racial Undercurrents: Health Management Experiences of Black Older Adults Living in Affordable Housing, 2025, American Journal of Occupational Therapy
  • Engagement with Meditation Apps: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Use and Associations (Preprint), 2025, Journal of Medical Internet Research
  • Timing ist alles - Wie gut treffen wir das optimale Fenster für die Lungenreifung, eine monozentrische Analyse, 2025, Zeitschrift für Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie

Judith E. Adams frequently collaborated with several coauthors, including:

  • M Wilmes
  • L Rath
  • B Grüttner
  • T Menzel
  • Tanja Groten

Their research appeared most often in the following publication venues:

  • Zeitschrift für Geburtshilfe und Neonatologie
  • American Journal of Occupational Therapy
  • Journal of Medical Internet Research

The main subfields of study in which they contributed were:

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Applied Psychology
  • General Health Professions

The primary research topics addressed in their work included:

  • Urban, Neighborhood, and Segregation Studies
  • Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
  • Impact of Technology on Adolescents

Best Publications

  • Effects of Testosterone on Muscle Strength, Physical Function, Body Composition, and Quality of Life in Intermediate-Frail and Frail Elderly Men: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

    Upendram Srinivas-Shankar;Stephen A. Roberts;Martin J. Connolly;Matthew D. L. O'Connell

  • Clinical use of quantitative computed tomography and peripheral quantitative computed tomography in the management of osteoporosis in adults: the 2007 ISCD Official Positions.

    Klaus Engelke;Judith E. Adams;Gabriele Armbrecht;Peter Augat

  • Low magnitude mechanical loading is osteogenic in children with disabling conditions.

    Kate Ward;Chrissie Alsop;Janette Caulton;Clinton Rubin

  • Quantitative computed tomography.

    Judith E. Adams

  • Reduced bone mineral density in patients with adult onset growth hormone deficiency

    Sarah J Holmes;G Economou;R W Whitehouse;J E Adams

  • Effect of Anastrozole on Bone Mineral Density: 5-Year Results From the Anastrozole, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination Trial 18233230

    Richard Eastell;Judith E. Adams;Robert E. Coleman;Anthony Howell

  • Benefit of cervical screening at different ages: evidence from the UK audit of screening histories

    P Sasieni;J Adams;J Cuzick

  • Radiation exposure in X-ray-based imaging techniques used in osteoporosis

    John Damilakis;Judith E. Adams;Judith E. Adams;Giuseppe Guglielmi;Thomas M. Link

  • Vitamin D status and muscle function in post-menarchal adolescent girls

    Kate A. Ward;Geeta Das;Jacqueline L. Berry;Stephen A. Roberts

  • Sarcopenia and its relationship with bone mineral density in middle-aged and elderly European men

    Sabine Verschueren;Evelien Gielen;T W O'Neill;S R Pye

  • Effect of an Aromatase Inhibitor on BMD and Bone Turnover Markers: 2‐Year Results of the Anastrozole, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination (ATAC) Trial (18233230)

    Richard Eastell;Rosemary A Hannon;Jack Cuzick;Mitch Dowsett

  • Cohort Profile: Updating the cohort profile for the MRC National Survey of Health and Development: a new clinic-based data collection for ageing research

    Diana Kuh;Mary Pierce;Judith Adams;John Deanfield

  • Association between vertebral fracture and increased mortality in osteoporotic patients.

    Tarja Jalava;Seppo Sarna;Liisa Pylkkänen;Barbara Mawer

  • Mandibular bone mineral density as a predictor of skeletal osteoporosis

    K Horner;H Devlin;C W Alsop;I M Hodgkinson

  • Increased Bone Density after Recombinant Human Growth Hormone (GH) Therapy in Adults with Isolated GH Deficiency

    D J O'Halloran;Agathocles Tsatsoulis;R W Whitehouse;S J Holmes

  • Quantitative ultrasound of the heel and fracture risk assessment: an updated meta-analysis

    Alireza Moayyeri;J. E. Adams;R. A. Adler;M. A. Krieg

  • Low bone mineral density in adults with cystic fibrosis

    C S Haworth;P L Selby;A K Webb;M E Dodd

  • Osteopenia, Neurological Dysfunction, and the Development of Charcot Neuroarthropathy

    Matthew J Young;Andrew Marshall;Judith E Adams;Peter L Selby

  • Identification of vertebral fractures: an update.

    L. Ferrar;G. Jiang;J. Adams;R. Eastell;R. Eastell

  • Bone Loss in Celiac Disease Is Related to Secondary Hyperparathyroidism

    P L Selby;M Davies;J E Adams;E B Mawer

Frequent Co-Authors

Terence W. O'Neill
Terence W. O'Neill University of Manchester
Frederick C. W. Wu
Frederick C. W. Wu University of Manchester
Steven Boonen
Steven Boonen KU Leuven
Diana Kuh
Diana Kuh University College London
Alan J. Silman
Alan J. Silman University of Oxford
Ilpo Huhtaniemi
Ilpo Huhtaniemi Imperial College London
Aleksander Giwercman
Aleksander Giwercman Lund University
Felipe F. Casanueva
Felipe F. Casanueva University of Santiago de Compostela
Gianni Forti
Gianni Forti University of Florence

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

Considering a career in medicine or healthcare opens up a wide range of online degree options and career pathways. Beyond medical school, many students pursue alternative healthcare roles that are equally vital and rewarding. For instance, those interested in leadership and administration may explore an accelerated healthcare administration degree online, which can fast-track entry into hospital management or healthcare organizations.

Registered nurses aiming to advance their careers might consider rn to np bridge programs. These programs allow RNs to become Nurse Practitioners, expanding their scope of practice and earning potential. If nutrition and wellness are your passions, accredited nutrition degrees online can lead to roles such as dietitian, nutritionist, or wellness coach.

When researching healthcare administration, it’s essential to verify program quality. Make sure to check which online healthcare administration programs have cahme accreditation? as this ensures the program meets rigorous industry standards. Exploring these options can help shape a fulfilling career in healthcare through flexible, online pathways.

Best Scientists Citing Judith E. Adams

Recently Published Articles