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
Neuroscience 48 6100 5617 2664 2403 69 13128

Linda Noble publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Linda Noble between 1983 and 2021, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Linda Noble published across 39 years, from 1983 to 2021, averaging 1.8 papers a year. Output peaked at 6 publications in 1989. 2 of the 69 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
2 4 6
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1983 to 2021. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 6. Peak 6 publications in 1989. 1983: 2 publications 1984: 0 publications 1985: 1 publication 1986: 0 publications 1987: 3 publications 1988: 4 publications 1989: 6 publications 1990: 2 publications 1991: 2 publications 1992: 4 publications 1993: 3 publications 1994: 2 publications 1995: 6 publications 1996: 6 publications 1997: 2 publications 1998: 4 publications 1999: 0 publications 2000: 3 publications 2001: 3 publications 2002: 2 publications 2003: 3 publications 2004: 2 publications 2005: 1 publication 2006: 0 publications 2007: 0 publications 2008: 0 publications 2009: 0 publications 2010: 1 publication 2011: 0 publications 2012: 2 publications 2013: 0 publications 2014: 1 publication 2015: 1 publication 2016: 1 publication 2017: 0 publications 2018: 0 publications 2019: 0 publications 2020: 0 publications 2021: 2 publications
1983 2021

69 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Linda Noble: publications per year, 1983 to 2021
Year Publications
1983 2
1984 0
1985 1
1986 0
1987 3
1988 4
1989 6
1990 2
1991 2
1992 4
1993 3
1994 2
1995 6
1996 6
1997 2
1998 4
1999 0
2000 3
2001 3
2002 2
2003 3
2004 2
2005 1
2006 0
2007 0
2008 0
2009 0
2010 1
2011 0
2012 2
2013 0
2014 1
2015 1
2016 1
2017 0
2018 0
2019 0
2020 0
2021 2
Total 69
Download as CSV

Linda Noble publication distribution in Neuroscience in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Neuroscience in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Linda Noble sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400 500
Bar chart with 86 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 38–47 to 887+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 539. Most scientists, 539, have 98–107 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 68–77 publications, is where this scientist sits. 38–47 publications: 18 scientists 48–57 publications: 79 scientists 58–67 publications: 193 scientists 68–77 publications: 323 scientists 78–87 publications: 406 scientists 88–97 publications: 452 scientists 98–107 publications: 539 scientists 108–117 publications: 505 scientists 118–127 publications: 522 scientists 128–137 publications: 469 scientists 138–147 publications: 456 scientists 148–157 publications: 459 scientists 158–167 publications: 397 scientists 168–177 publications: 383 scientists 178–187 publications: 350 scientists 188–197 publications: 302 scientists 198–207 publications: 306 scientists 208–217 publications: 262 scientists 218–227 publications: 242 scientists 228–237 publications: 220 scientists 238–247 publications: 203 scientists 248–257 publications: 174 scientists 258–267 publications: 176 scientists 268–277 publications: 175 scientists 278–287 publications: 125 scientists 288–297 publications: 116 scientists 298–307 publications: 127 scientists 308–317 publications: 128 scientists 318–327 publications: 99 scientists 328–337 publications: 89 scientists 338–347 publications: 78 scientists 348–357 publications: 96 scientists 358–367 publications: 66 scientists 368–377 publications: 59 scientists 378–387 publications: 65 scientists 388–397 publications: 54 scientists 398–407 publications: 48 scientists 408–417 publications: 49 scientists 418–427 publications: 34 scientists 428–437 publications: 31 scientists 438–447 publications: 30 scientists 448–457 publications: 31 scientists 458–467 publications: 36 scientists 468–477 publications: 40 scientists 478–487 publications: 35 scientists 488–497 publications: 30 scientists 498–507 publications: 23 scientists 508–517 publications: 26 scientists 518–527 publications: 20 scientists 528–537 publications: 23 scientists 538–547 publications: 20 scientists 548–557 publications: 20 scientists 558–567 publications: 17 scientists 568–577 publications: 14 scientists 578–587 publications: 20 scientists 588–597 publications: 20 scientists 598–607 publications: 19 scientists 608–617 publications: 18 scientists 618–627 publications: 17 scientists 628–637 publications: 11 scientists 638–647 publications: 11 scientists 648–657 publications: 11 scientists 658–667 publications: 8 scientists 668–677 publications: 7 scientists 678–687 publications: 11 scientists 688–697 publications: 10 scientists 698–707 publications: 4 scientists 708–717 publications: 6 scientists 718–727 publications: 5 scientists 728–737 publications: 5 scientists 738–747 publications: 9 scientists 748–757 publications: 9 scientists 758–767 publications: 3 scientists 768–777 publications: 7 scientists 778–787 publications: 7 scientists 788–797 publications: 6 scientists 798–807 publications: 2 scientists 808–817 publications: 2 scientists 818–827 publications: 7 scientists 828–837 publications: 0 scientists 838–847 publications: 9 scientists 848–857 publications: 3 scientists 858–867 publications: 1 scientist 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38–47 publications 887+

This scientist: 69 publications — 4th percentile

4% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Neuroscience scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,597 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
38–47 18
48–57 79
58–67 193
68–77 323 69
78–87 406
88–97 452
98–107 539
108–117 505
118–127 522
128–137 469
138–147 456
148–157 459
158–167 397
168–177 383
178–187 350
188–197 302
198–207 306
208–217 262
218–227 242
228–237 220
238–247 203
248–257 174
258–267 176
268–277 175
278–287 125
288–297 116
298–307 127
308–317 128
318–327 99
328–337 89
338–347 78
348–357 96
358–367 66
368–377 59
378–387 65
388–397 54
398–407 48
408–417 49
418–427 34
428–437 31
438–447 30
448–457 31
458–467 36
468–477 40
478–487 35
488–497 30
498–507 23
508–517 26
518–527 20
528–537 23
538–547 20
548–557 20
558–567 17
568–577 14
578–587 20
588–597 20
598–607 19
608–617 18
618–627 17
628–637 11
638–647 11
648–657 11
658–667 8
668–677 7
678–687 11
688–697 10
698–707 4
708–717 6
718–727 5
728–737 5
738–747 9
748–757 9
758–767 3
768–777 7
778–787 7
788–797 6
798–807 2
808–817 2
818–827 7
828–837 0
838–847 9
848–857 3
858–867 1
868–877 3
878–886 6
887+ 100
Download as CSV

Linda Noble D-index placement in Neuroscience in 2026

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

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400 500
Bar chart with 68 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 163+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 512. Most scientists, 512, have 46–47 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 48–49 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 30–31 D-Index: 42 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 172 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 296 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 435 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 459 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 456 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 467 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 478 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 512 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 435 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 425 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 418 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 392 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 357 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 334 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 328 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 260 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 278 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 239 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 250 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 210 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 200 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 189 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 170 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 146 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 113 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 126 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 100 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 84 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 99 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 84 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 85 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 72 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 76 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 45 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 49 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 43 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 32 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 45 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 50 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 32 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 39 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 29 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 27 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 19 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 23 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 27 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 16 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 24 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 13 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 21 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 17 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 14 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 15 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 10 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 10 scientists 144–145 D-Index: 13 scientists 146–147 D-Index: 9 scientists 148–149 D-Index: 8 scientists 150–151 D-Index: 6 scientists 152–153 D-Index: 6 scientists 154–155 D-Index: 7 scientists 156–157 D-Index: 7 scientists 158–159 D-Index: 10 scientists 160–161 D-Index: 4 scientists 162 D-Index: 8 scientists 163+ D-Index: 100 scientists
30–31 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 48 D-Index — 37th percentile

37% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Neuroscience scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,597 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 42
32–33 172
34–35 296
36–37 435
38–39 459
40–41 456
42–43 467
44–45 478
46–47 512
48–49 435 48
50–51 425
52–53 418
54–55 392
56–57 357
58–59 334
60–61 328
62–63 260
64–65 278
66–67 239
68–69 250
70–71 210
72–73 200
74–75 189
76–77 170
78–79 146
80–81 113
82–83 126
84–85 100
86–87 84
88–89 99
90–91 84
92–93 85
94–95 72
96–97 76
98–99 45
100–101 49
102–103 43
104–105 32
106–107 45
108–109 50
110–111 32
112–113 39
114–115 32
116–117 29
118–119 27
120–121 19
122–123 23
124–125 27
126–127 16
128–129 24
130–131 13
132–133 21
134–135 17
136–137 14
138–139 15
140–141 10
142–143 10
144–145 13
146–147 9
148–149 8
150–151 6
152–153 6
154–155 7
156–157 7
158–159 10
160–161 4
162 8
163+ 100
Download as CSV

Overview

What is she best known for?

The fields of study she is best known for:

  • Internal medicine
  • Biochemistry
  • Pathology

Her primary scientific interests are in Spinal cord, Spinal cord injury, Pathology, Lesion and Cord. In her work, Extravasation, Brainstem and Evans Blue is strongly intertwined with Anesthesia, which is a subfield of Spinal cord. Her Spinal cord injury research is multidisciplinary, incorporating elements of Surgery, Physical therapy, Analysis of variance and Cohort.

The concepts of her Pathology study are interwoven with issues in Head injury, Astrogliosis and Cortex. Her Cord research includes themes of Inflammation and Neuroplasticity. Her research in Inflammation tackles topics such as Pathogenesis which are related to areas like Neuroscience.

Her most cited work include:

  • Dilated Cardiomyopathy and Neonatal Lethality in Mutant Mice Lacking Manganese Superoxide Dismutase (1557 citations)
  • TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY IN THE RAT: CHARACTERIZATION OF A LATERAL FLUID-PERCUSSION MODEL (1000 citations)
  • A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research (800 citations)

What are the main themes of her work throughout her whole career to date?

Pathology, Spinal cord, Spinal cord injury, Neuroscience and Central nervous system are her primary areas of study. Her Pathology research incorporates elements of Microglia, Hippocampus, Cortex and Blood–brain barrier. The various areas that Linda Noble examines in her Spinal cord study include Anesthesia, Lesion, Cord and Anatomy.

Her work carried out in the field of Spinal cord injury brings together such families of science as NMDA receptor, Central nervous system disease, Pathophysiology and Nalmefene. Her Neuroscience research includes elements of Internal medicine and Endocrinology. Her work on Neuroglia as part of her general Central nervous system study is frequently connected to Heme oxygenase, thereby bridging the divide between different branches of science.

She most often published in these fields:

  • Pathology (47.14%)
  • Spinal cord (37.14%)
  • Spinal cord injury (27.14%)

What were the highlights of her more recent work (between 1999-2016)?

  • Central nervous system (27.14%)
  • Neuroscience (31.43%)
  • Spinal cord (37.14%)

In recent papers she was focusing on the following fields of study:

Linda Noble focuses on Central nervous system, Neuroscience, Spinal cord, Internal medicine and Endocrinology. Her Central nervous system study combines topics from a wide range of disciplines, such as Ultrastructure, Anatomy, Ischemia, Necrosis and Programmed cell death. Neuroscience is a component of her Cortex and Hippocampus studies.

She is interested in Spinal cord injury, which is a field of Spinal cord. She combines subjects such as Anesthesia, Lesion, Cord and Neuroprotection with her study of Spinal cord injury. Within one scientific family, she focuses on topics pertaining to Superoxide dismutase under Microglia, and may sometimes address concerns connected to Molecular biology.

Between 1999 and 2016, her most popular works were:

  • A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research (800 citations)
  • Matrix Metalloproteinases Limit Functional Recovery after Spinal Cord Injury by Modulation of Early Vascular Events (378 citations)
  • Vascular Events After Spinal Cord Injury: Contribution to Secondary Pathogenesis (297 citations)

In her most recent research, the most cited papers focused on:

  • Internal medicine
  • Pathology
  • Biochemistry

The scientist’s investigation covers issues in Neuroscience, Cortex, Hippocampus, Spinal cord and Inflammation. Linda Noble has included themes like Human brain, NeuN and Pyramidal tracts in her Cortex study. The Hippocampus study combines topics in areas such as Cerebral cortex, Central nervous system, Cerebellum and Thalamus.

Her Spinal cord research is multidisciplinary, relying on both Meninges, Vascular permeability, Pathology and Cord. Cord is closely attributed to Anesthesia in her research. Her Inflammation study combines topics from a wide range of disciplines, such as Lesion, Neuroplasticity, Angiogenesis and Pathogenesis.

Best Publications

  • Dilated Cardiomyopathy and Neonatal Lethality in Mutant Mice Lacking Manganese Superoxide Dismutase

    Yibing Li;Ting-Ting Huang;Elaine J. Carlson;Simon Melov

  • TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY IN THE RAT: CHARACTERIZATION OF A LATERAL FLUID-PERCUSSION MODEL

    T. K. McIntosh;R. Vink;Linda Noble;I. Yamakami

  • A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research

    Story C. Landis;Susan G. Amara;Khusru Asadullah;Chris P. Austin

  • MASCIS Evaluation of Open Field Locomotor Scores: Effects of Experience and Teamwork on Reliability

    D. M. Basso;M. S. Beattie;J. C. Bresnahan;D. K. Anderson

  • Matrix Metalloproteinases Limit Functional Recovery after Spinal Cord Injury by Modulation of Early Vascular Events

    Linda J. Noble;Frances Donovan;Takuji Igarashi;Staci Goussev

  • Experimental fluid percussion brain injury: vascular disruption and neuronal and glial alterations

    Selina C. Cortez;T. K. McIntosh;Linda Noble

  • Vascular Events After Spinal Cord Injury: Contribution to Secondary Pathogenesis

    Angelika Em Mautes;Martin R Weinzierl;Frances Donovan;Linda J Noble

  • Endogenous repair after spinal cord contusion injuries in the rat.

    M. S. Beattie;J. C. Bresnahan;J. Komon;C. A. Tovar

  • Spinal cord contusion in the rat: Morphometric analyses of alterations in the spinal cord

    L.J. Noble;Jean R. Wrathall

  • Traumatic brain injury in the rat: characterization of a midline fluid-percussion model.

    Tracy K. McIntosh;Linda Noble;Brian Andrews;Alan I. Faden

  • Correlative analyses of lesion development and functional status after graded spinal cord contusive injuries in the rat.

    Linda Noble;Jean R. Wrathall

  • Distribution and time course of protein extravasation in the rat spinal cord after contusive injury.

    Linda Noble;Jean R. Wrathall

  • MK-801 and ketamine induce heat shock protein HSP72 in injured neurons in posterior cingulate and retrosplenial cortex.

    Frank R. Sharp;Pat Jasper;John Hall;Linda Noble;Linda Noble

  • Neuronal injury and loss after traumatic brain injury: Time course and regional variability

    Motoki Sato;Edward Chang;Takuji Igarashi;L.J Noble

  • Breakdown of the blood-brain barrier after fluid percussive brain injury in the rat. Part 1: Distribution and time course of protein extravasation.

    Hirokazu Tanno;Russ P. Nockels;Lawrence H. Pitts;Linda Noble

  • N-Methyl-d-Aspartate Antagonist MK801 Improves Outcome Following Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury in Rats: Behavioral, Anatomic, and Neurochemical Studies

    Alan I. Faden;Matthias Lemke;Roger P. Simon;Linda J. Noble

  • Heme Oxygenase-1 is Induced in Glia Throughout Brain by Subarachnoid Hemoglobin

    Christopher P. Turner;Marcelle Bergeron;Paul Matz;Angelo Zegna

  • Induction of heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1) in glia after traumatic brain injury

    Kazumasa Fukuda;Jeremy D. Richmon;Jeremy D. Richmon;Motoki Sato;Frank R. Sharp

  • Haloperidol prevents induction of the hsp70 heat shock gene in neurons injured by phencyclidine (PCP), MK801, and ketamine.

    F. R. Sharp;M. Butman;M. Butman;S. Wang;S. Wang;J. Koistinaho;J. Koistinaho

  • Traumatic Brain Injury in the Immature Mouse Brain: Characterization of Regional Vulnerability

    Winnie Tong;Takuji Igarashi;Donna M. Ferriero;Linda J. Noble

Frequent Co-Authors

Alan I. Faden
Alan I. Faden University of Maryland, Baltimore
Frank R. Sharp
Frank R. Sharp University of California, Davis
Jean R. Wrathall
Jean R. Wrathall Georgetown University Medical Center
Tracy K. McIntosh
Tracy K. McIntosh Media NeuroConsultants
Pak H. Chan
Pak H. Chan Stanford University
Stephen M. Sagar
Stephen M. Sagar University of California, San Francisco
Donna M. Ferriero
Donna M. Ferriero University of California, San Francisco
Robert Vink
Robert Vink University of South Australia
Jacqueline C. Bresnahan
Jacqueline C. Bresnahan University of California, San Francisco
Zena Werb
Zena Werb University of California, San Francisco

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:

Best Scientists Citing Linda Noble

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles