World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
38
Citations
11563
World Ranking
9973
National Ranking
620

Kathrin Cresswell publication distribution in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Computer Science in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Kathrin Cresswell sits on this spectrum.

32–41 publications: 7 scientists 42–51 publications: 22 scientists 52–61 publications: 82 scientists 62–71 publications: 134 scientists 72–81 publications: 249 scientists 82–91 publications: 324 scientists 92–101 publications: 421 scientists 102–111 publications: 420 scientists 112–121 publications: 497 scientists 122–131 publications: 544 scientists 132–141 publications: 555 scientists 142–151 publications: 609 scientists 152–161 publications: 559 scientists 162–171 publications: 534 scientists 172–181 publications: 556 scientists 182–191 publications: 583 scientists 192–201 publications: 519 scientists 202–211 publications: 508 scientists 212–221 publications: 490 scientists 222–231 publications: 437 scientists 232–241 publications: 423 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 377 scientists 262–271 publications: 301 scientists 272–281 publications: 335 scientists 282–291 publications: 320 scientists 292–301 publications: 293 scientists 302–311 publications: 250 scientists 312–321 publications: 238 scientists 322–331 publications: 206 scientists 332–341 publications: 209 scientists 342–351 publications: 208 scientists 352–361 publications: 162 scientists 362–371 publications: 176 scientists 372–381 publications: 127 scientists 382–391 publications: 158 scientists 392–401 publications: 128 scientists 402–411 publications: 104 scientists 412–421 publications: 94 scientists 422–431 publications: 99 scientists 432–441 publications: 83 scientists 442–451 publications: 108 scientists 452–461 publications: 73 scientists 462–471 publications: 77 scientists 472–481 publications: 69 scientists 482–491 publications: 84 scientists 492–501 publications: 62 scientists 502–511 publications: 54 scientists 512–521 publications: 57 scientists 522–531 publications: 51 scientists 532–541 publications: 51 scientists 542–551 publications: 32 scientists 552–561 publications: 38 scientists 562–571 publications: 28 scientists 572–581 publications: 43 scientists 582–591 publications: 33 scientists 592–601 publications: 41 scientists 602–611 publications: 32 scientists 612–621 publications: 28 scientists 622–631 publications: 25 scientists 632–641 publications: 27 scientists 642–651 publications: 17 scientists 652–661 publications: 20 scientists 662–671 publications: 17 scientists 672–681 publications: 15 scientists 682–691 publications: 14 scientists 692–701 publications: 21 scientists 702–711 publications: 13 scientists 712–721 publications: 12 scientists 722–731 publications: 19 scientists 732–741 publications: 14 scientists 742–751 publications: 12 scientists 752–761 publications: 10 scientists 762–771 publications: 10 scientists 772–781 publications: 11 scientists 782–791 publications: 10 scientists 792–801 publications: 11 scientists 802–811 publications: 8 scientists 812–821 publications: 8 scientists 822–831 publications: 7 scientists 832–841 publications: 11 scientists 842–851 publications: 10 scientists 852–861 publications: 5 scientists 862–871 publications: 9 scientists 872–881 publications: 4 scientists 882–891 publications: 6 scientists 892–901 publications: 3 scientists 902–911 publications: 6 scientists 912–921 publications: 3 scientists 922–931 publications: 2 scientists 932–941 publications: 2 scientists 942–951 publications: 2 scientists 952–961 publications: 3 scientists 962–971 publications: 3 scientists 972–981 publications: 3 scientists 982–990 publications: 5 scientists 991+ publications: 100 scientists
32 publications 991+

This scientist: 131 publications — 19th percentile

19% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more.

Kathrin Cresswell D-index placement in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Computer Science scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Kathrin Cresswell sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 983 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 968 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 763 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 518 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 500 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 458 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 400 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 337 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 308 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 292 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 249 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 213 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 192 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 189 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 165 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 139 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 119 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 121 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 113 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 88 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 87 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 75 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 69 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 57 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 46 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 38 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 34 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 36 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 27 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 37 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 18 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 31 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 19 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 16 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 20 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 15 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 5 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 20 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 8 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 5 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 7 scientists 130 D-Index: 3 scientists 131+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 38 D-Index — 30th percentile

30% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more.

Overview

Kathrin Cresswell is affiliated with the University of Edinburgh in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily spans the fields of Health Professions and Medicine, with a focus on specialized subfields such as Health Information Management, General Health Professions, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Health Informatics, and Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management.

The scientist's work covers several main topics including Electronic Health Records Systems, Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation, Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education, Healthcare Systems and Technology, Mobile Health and mHealth Applications, Antibiotic Use and Resistance, and Patient Satisfaction in Healthcare.

Recent notable publications by Kathrin Cresswell include:

  • Developing and Applying a Formative Evaluation Framework for Health Information Technology Implementations: Qualitative Investigation (2020), Journal of Medical Internet Research
  • Investigating the use of data-driven artificial intelligence in computerised decision support systems for health and social care: A systematic review (2020), Health Informatics Journal

Frequent co-authors in the scientist's research collaborations are:

  • Robin Williams
  • Aziz Sheikh
  • Hajar Mozaffar
  • Susan Hinder
  • Sally Eason

Kathrin Cresswell's publications are frequently featured in several academic journals, with a considerable number appearing in:

  • Journal of Medical Internet Research
  • Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
  • BMJ Health & Care Informatics
  • BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
  • Yearbook of Medical Informatics

Their research often addresses the integration of technology in healthcare settings, including the evaluation and implementation of electronic health systems and the examination of artificial intelligence applications for health decision support. The scientist's work contributes to understanding the complexity of healthcare systems and technology adoption.

Best Publications

  • The case study approach

    Sarah Crowe;Kathrin Cresswell;Ann Robertson;Guro Huby

  • The impact of eHealth on the quality and safety of health care: a systematic overview.

    Ashly D. Black;Josip Car;Claudia Pagliari;Chantelle Anandan

  • Organizational issues in the implementation and adoption of health information technology innovations: An interpretative review

    Kathrin M. Cresswell;Aziz Sheikh

  • A pharmacist-led information technology intervention for medication errors (PINCER): a multicentre, cluster randomised, controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis

    Anthony J Avery;Sarah Rodgers;Judith A Cantrill;Sarah Armstrong

  • Actor-Network Theory and its role in understanding the implementation of information technology developments in healthcare.

    Kathrin M Cresswell;Allison Worth;Aziz Sheikh

  • Ten key considerations for the successful implementation and adoption of large-scale health information technology

    Kathrin M Cresswell;David W Bates;David W Bates;Aziz Sheikh

  • Clinical Decision Support Systems Could Be Modified To Reduce ‘Alert Fatigue’ While Still Minimizing The Risk Of Litigation

    Aaron S. Kesselheim;Kathrin Cresswell;Shobha Phansalkar;David W. Bates

  • Health Care Robotics: Qualitative Exploration of Key Challenges and Future Directions

    Kathrin Cresswell;Sarah Cunningham-Burley;Aziz Sheikh

  • Integration of a nationally procured electronic health record system into user work practices

    Kathrin M Cresswell;Allison Worth;Aziz Sheikh

  • Computerised decision support systems for healthcare professionals: an interpretative review.

    Kathrin Cresswell;Azeem Majeed;David W Bates;Aziz Sheikh

  • Workarounds to hospital electronic prescribing systems: a qualitative study in English hospitals

    Kathrin M Cresswell;Hajar Mozaffar;Lisa Lee;Robin Williams

  • Understanding Contrasting Approaches to Nationwide Implementations of Electronic Health Record Systems: England, the USA and Australia

    Zoe Morrison;Anne Robertson;Kathrin Cresswell;Sarah Crowe

  • The NHS Care Record Service (NHS CRS): recommendations from the literature on successful implementation and adoption

    Kathrin Cresswell;Aziz Sheikh

  • Developing and Applying a Formative Evaluation Framework for Health Information Technology Implementations: Qualitative Investigation.

    Kathrin Cresswell;Robin Williams;Aziz Sheikh

  • Investigating and Learning Lessons from Early Experiences of Implementing ePrescribing Systems into NHS Hospitals: A Questionnaire Study

    Kathrin Cresswell;Jamie Coleman;Ann Slee;Robin Williams

  • Implementing and adopting electronic health record systems: How actor‐network theory can support evaluation

    Kathrin Cresswell;Allison Worth;Aziz Sheikh

  • Online Guide for Electronic Health Evaluation Approaches: Systematic Scoping Review and Concept Mapping Study

    Tobias N. Bonten;Anneloek Rauwerdink;Jeremy C. Wyatt;Marise J. Kasteleyn

  • Investigating the use of data-driven artificial intelligence in computerised decision support systems for health and social care: A systematic review.

    Kathrin M. Cresswell;Margaret Callaghan;Sheraz Khan;Zakariya Sheikh

  • Anything but engaged: user involvement in the context of a national electronic health record implementation.

    Kathrin Cresswell;Zoe Morrison;Sarah Crowe;Ann Robertson

  • Undertaking sociotechnical evaluations of health information technologies

    Kathrin M Cresswell;Aziz Sheikh

  • ‘Too much, too late’: mixed methods multi-channel video recording study of computerized decision support systems and GP prescribing

    James Hayward;Fionagh Thomson;Heather Milne;Susan Buckingham

  • Evaluation of medium-term consequences of implementing commercial computerized physician order entry and clinical decision support prescribing systems in two ‘early adopter’ hospitals

    Kathrin M Cresswell;David W Bates;Robin Williams;Zoe Morrison

  • Reconceptualising the digital maturity of health systems

    Kathrin Cresswell;Aziz Sheikh;Marta Krasuska;Catherine Heeney

Frequent Co-Authors

Aziz Sheikh
Aziz Sheikh University of Oxford
Robin Williams
Robin Williams University of Edinburgh
David W. Bates
David W. Bates Brigham and Women's Hospital
Claudia Pagliari
Claudia Pagliari University of Edinburgh
Henry W. W. Potts
Henry W. W. Potts University College London
Azeem Majeed
Azeem Majeed Imperial College London
Josip Car
Josip Car Imperial College London
Robin J. Prescott
Robin J. Prescott University of Edinburgh
Rob Procter
Rob Procter University of Warwick
Heleen Riper
Heleen Riper Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam

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

Exploring Computer Science in the USA opens doors to several related online degrees and high-demand career options. Today, flexible online programs allow you to pursue specialized fields like online theoretical physics degree or even electrical engineering from anywhere in the world.

Many students consider interdisciplinary paths to boost employability. For example, a data scientist degree combines computer science skills with data analytics, making graduates highly attractive to tech companies and startups. Likewise, some of the top online electrical engineering schools offer programs that balance affordability with a strong reputation among employers.

If you want to enhance your skills with less time commitment, consider easy certifications to get that lead to well-paying tech roles. These certifications can be a smart way to enter the IT workforce or accelerate your career alongside your degree.

Combining online degrees and certifications empowers you to tailor your education to your career goals and the evolving job market.

Best Scientists Citing Kathrin Cresswell

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles