World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
138
Citations
127722
World Ranking
1786
National Ranking
186

Julian Peto 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 Julian Peto 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: 424 publications — 44th percentile

44% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Julian Peto 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 Julian Peto 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: 138 D-Index — 91st percentile

91% 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

  • 2019 - Fellow of the Royal Society, United Kingdom
  • Fellow of The Academy of Medical Sciences, United Kingdom
  • Fellow of The Academy of Medical Sciences, United Kingdom

Overview

Julian Peto is affiliated with the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine in the United Kingdom. Their research focuses on fields within Agricultural and Biological Sciences, particularly Plant Science and Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics. The thematic areas of their work include Fungal Plant Pathogen Control, Plant Physiology and Cultivation Studies, and Plant Disease Resistance and Genetics.

Their publication record includes contributions to the journal Acta Horticulturae. One of their recent papers is titled Identification of scab resistance genes in new Hungarian apple hybrids using SCAR and SSR markers, published in 2021 in Acta Horticulturae.

Julian Peto has collaborated frequently with several researchers in their field. These co-authors include:

  • Ildikó Király
  • Virág Mihalka
  • A. Hüvely
  • András Palkovics
  • M. Tóth

Their contributions to science have been recognized through fellowship awards. They were made a Fellow of the Royal Society in the United Kingdom in 2019 and are a Fellow of The Academy of Medical Sciences in the United Kingdom.

Best Publications

  • Human papillomavirus is a necessary cause of invasive cervical cancer worldwide.

    J. M. M. Walboomers;M. V. Jacobs;M. M. Manos;F. X. Bosch

  • Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. II. analysis and examples.

    R Peto;M C Pike;P Armitage;N E Breslow

  • Identification of the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2

    Wooster R;Bignell G;Lancaster J;Swift S

  • Prevalence of Human Papillomavirus in Cervical Cancer: a Worldwide Perspective

    F X Bosch;M M Manos;N Muñoz;M Sherman

  • Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case series unselected for family history: a combined analysis of 22 studies

    A. Antoniou;P.D.P. Pharoah;S. Narod;H.A. Risch

  • Asymptotically Efficient Rank Invariant Test Procedures

    Richard Peto;Julian Peto

  • Genetic Heterogeneity and Penetrance Analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 Genes in Breast Cancer Families

    D Ford;D F Easton;M Stratton;S Narod

  • Breast cancer and hormone replacement therapy: collaborative reanalysis of data from 51 epidemiological studies of 52 705 women with breast cancer and 108 411 women without breast cancer

    E. E. Calle;C. W. Heath;R. J. Coates;J. M. Liff

  • Genome-wide association study identifies novel breast cancer susceptibility loci

    Douglas F. Easton;Karen A. Pooley;Alison M. Dunning;Paul D. P. Pharoah

  • Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. I. Introduction and design.

    R. Peto;M. C. Pike;P. Armitage;N. E. Breslow

  • Localization of a breast cancer susceptibility gene, BRCA2, to chromosome 13q12-13

    Richard Wooster;Susan L. Neuhausen;Jonathan Mangion;Yvette Quirk

  • Efficacy of HPV-based screening for prevention of invasive cervical cancer: follow-up of four European randomised controlled trials

    Guglielmo Ronco;Joakim Dillner;K Miriam Elfström;Sara Tunesi

  • Breast cancer and hormonal contraceptives : collaborative reanalysis of individual data on 53.297 women with breast cancer and 100.239 women without breast cancer from 54 epidemiological studies

    E. E. Calle;C. W. Heath;H. L. Miracle-McMahill;R. J. Coates

  • Modeling Linkage Disequilibrium Increases Accuracy of Polygenic Risk Scores

    Bjarni J. Vilhjálmsson;Jian Yang;Hilary K. Finucane;Alexander Gusev

  • Association analysis identifies 65 new breast cancer risk loci

    Kyriaki Michailidou;Kyriaki Michailidou;Sara Lindström;Sara Lindström;Joe Dennis;Jonathan Beesley

  • Low-penetrance susceptibility to breast cancer due to CHEK2(*)1100delC in noncarriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations

    Hanne Meijers-Heijboer;Ans van den Ouweland;Jan Klijn;Marijke Wasielewski

  • Large-scale genotyping identifies 41 new loci associated with breast cancer risk

    Kyriaki Michailidou;Per Hall;Anna Gonzalez-Neira;Maya Ghoussaini

  • Alcohol, tobacco and breast cancer - Collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 58 515 women with breast cancer and 95 067 women without the disease

    N Hamajima;K Hirose;K Tajima;T Rohan

  • The European mesothelioma epidemic.

    J Peto;J Peto;A Decarli;C La Vecchia;C La Vecchia;F Levi

  • Erratum: Identification of the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2

    Richard Wooster;Graham Bignell;Jonathan Lancaster;Sally Swift

Frequent Co-Authors

Hiltrud Brauch
Hiltrud Brauch German Cancer Research Center
Graham G. Giles
Graham G. Giles University of Melbourne
Roger L. Milne
Roger L. Milne Cancer Council Victoria
Douglas F. Easton
Douglas F. Easton University of Cambridge
Jenny Chang-Claude
Jenny Chang-Claude German Cancer Research Center
Barbara Burwinkel
Barbara Burwinkel Heidelberg University
Alison M. Dunning
Alison M. Dunning University of Cambridge
John L. Hopper
John L. Hopper University of Melbourne
Melissa C. Southey
Melissa C. Southey Monash University
Paul D.P. Pharoah
Paul D.P. Pharoah University of Cambridge

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 exploring diverse career opportunities in the healthcare field? Beyond traditional medical education, many students look for flexible pathways that align with their interests and schedules. Online programs now make it easier than ever to advance your education or transition into management roles.

If you're considering leadership positions, healthcare administration degrees are a popular option. These programs provide foundational knowledge in managing healthcare operations and are available fully online, making them accessible and affordable.

For those seeking advanced expertise, there are online mha programs affordable that focus on strategic decision-making and organizational leadership in healthcare environments.

Nursing professionals wanting to elevate their practice can consider the best online dnp programs, which offer flexible, high-level training for clinical and executive roles.

Pharmacists and those interested in medication sciences will find pharmacy school online accredited programs ideal for securing advanced credentials while maintaining their current work-life balance.

Best Scientists Citing Julian Peto

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles