World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
50
Citations
17150
World Ranking
5634
National Ranking
2497

Michael P. Harms 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 Michael P. Harms sits on this spectrum.

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 scientists 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 887+

This scientist: 92 publications — 13th percentile

13% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Michael P. Harms 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 Michael P. Harms sits on this spectrum.

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 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 50 D-Index — 41st percentile

41% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Michael P. Harms is affiliated with Washington University in St. Louis in the United States. Their research primarily spans fields such as Medicine and Neuroscience, with significant contributions to specialized subfields including Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging, Cognitive Neuroscience, Psychiatry and Mental Health, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, and Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis.

The scientist's work focuses on several main topics within brain and health sciences. These include:

  • Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Schizophrenia Research and Treatment
  • Health, Environment, Cognitive Aging
  • Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
  • Neural Dynamics and Brain Function

Michael P. Harms has been involved in multiple publications across various respected venues, with frequent publications in:

  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • NeuroImage
  • Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Schizophrenia
  • UNC Libraries

The scientist has collaborated frequently with other researchers. Recurring coauthors include:

  • Matthew F. Glasser
  • Deanna M. Barch
  • Essa Yacoub
  • David C. Van Essen
  • Susan Y. Bookheimer

Selected recent research papers authored or coauthored by Michael P. Harms cover diverse topics related to brain imaging and development. These works include:

  • The Human Connectome Project: A retrospective (2021, NeuroImage)
  • Baseline brain function in the preadolescents of the ABCD Study (2021, Nature Neuroscience)
  • Reliability and stability challenges in ABCD task fMRI data (2022, NeuroImage)
  • Graded Variation in T1w/T2w Ratio during Adolescence: Measurement, Caveats, and Implications for Development of Cortical Myelin (2022, Journal of Neuroscience)
  • Empirical transmit field bias correction of T1w/T2w myelin maps (2022, NeuroImage)

Best Publications

  • The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study: Imaging acquisition across 21 sites.

    B.J. Casey;B.J. Casey;Tariq Cannonier;May I. Conley;May I. Conley;Alexandra O. Cohen

  • Resting-state fMRI in the Human Connectome Project

    S M Smith;C F Beckmann;J Andersson;E J Auerbach

  • Function in the human connectome: Task-fMRI and individual differences in behavior

    M Deanna;Gregory C. Burgess;Michael P. Harms;Steven E. Petersen

  • Image processing and analysis methods for the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study.

    Donald J. Hagler;Sean N. Hatton;M. Daniela Cornejo;Carolina Makowski

  • The Human Connectome Project's neuroimaging approach

    Matthew F Glasser;Stephen M Smith;Daniel S Marcus;Jesper L R Andersson

  • The Effects of Poverty on Childhood Brain Development: The Mediating Effect of Caregiving and Stressful Life Events

    Joan Luby;Andy Belden;Kelly Botteron;Natasha Marrus

  • MSM: a new flexible framework for Multimodal Surface Matching.

    Emma C. Robinson;Saâd Jbabdi;Matthew F. Glasser;Jesper L. R. Andersson

  • Extending the Human Connectome Project across ages: Imaging protocols for the Lifespan Development and Aging projects

    Michael P. Harms;Leah H. Somerville;Beau M. Ances;Jesper Andersson

  • Human Connectome Project informatics: quality control, database services, and data visualization.

    Daniel S Marcus;Michael P Harms;Abraham Z Snyder;Mark Jenkinson

  • The Lifespan Human Connectome Project in Aging: An overview.

    Susan Y. Bookheimer;David H. Salat;Melissa Terpstra;Beau M. Ances

  • The Lifespan Human Connectome Project in Development: A large-scale study of brain connectivity development in 5-21 year olds.

    Leah H. Somerville;Susan Y. Bookheimer;Randy L. Buckner;Gregory C. Burgess

  • Using temporal ICA to selectively remove global noise while preserving global signal in functional MRI data.

    Matthew F. Glasser;Matthew F. Glasser;Timothy S. Coalson;Janine D. Bijsterbosch;Samuel J. Harrison

  • The Human Connectome Project: A retrospective.

    Jennifer Stine Elam;Matthew F. Glasser;Michael P. Harms;Stamatios N. Sotiropoulos

  • Evaluation of Denoising Strategies to Address Motion-Correlated Artifacts in Resting-State Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data from the Human Connectome Project.

    Gregory C. Burgess;Sridhar Kandala;Dan Nolan;Timothy O. Laumann

  • Stress-System Genes and Life Stress Predict Cortisol Levels and Amygdala and Hippocampal Volumes in Children

    David Pagliaccio;Joan L Luby;Ryan Bogdan;Arpana Agrawal

  • Sound Repetition Rate in the Human Auditory Pathway: Representations in the Waveshape and Amplitude of fMRI Activation

    Michael P. Harms;Michael P. Harms;Jennifer R. Melcher;Jennifer R. Melcher;Jennifer R. Melcher

  • Anterior thalamic radiation integrity in schizophrenia: a diffusion-tensor imaging study.

    Daniel Mamah;Thomas E. Conturo;Michael P. Harms;Erbil Akbudak

  • Fronto-parietal and cingulo-opercular network integrity and cognition in health and schizophrenia.

    Julia M. Sheffield;Grega Repovs;Michael P. Harms;Cameron S. Carter

  • Amygdala functional connectivity, HPA axis genetic variation, and life stress in children and relations to anxiety and emotion regulation.

    David Pagliaccio;Joan L. Luby;Ryan Bogdan;Arpana Agrawal

  • Preschool is a sensitive period for the influence of maternal support on the trajectory of hippocampal development

    Joan L. Luby;Andy Belden;Michael P. Harms;Rebecca Tillman

  • Temperament and character as schizophrenia-related endophenotypes in non-psychotic siblings

    Matthew J. Smith;C. Robert Cloninger;Michael P. Harms;John G. Csernansky

Frequent Co-Authors

Deanna M. Barch
Deanna M. Barch Washington University in St. Louis
Lei Wang
Lei Wang Northwestern University
John G. Csernansky
John G. Csernansky Northwestern University
Joan L. Luby
Joan L. Luby Washington University in St. Louis
Matthew F. Glasser
Matthew F. Glasser Washington University in St. Louis
David C. Van Essen
David C. Van Essen Washington University in St. Louis
Andy C. Belden
Andy C. Belden Washington University in St. Louis
Stephen M. Smith
Stephen M. Smith University of Oxford
Andrey P. Anokhin
Andrey P. Anokhin Washington University in St. Louis
Jennifer R. Melcher
Jennifer R. Melcher Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary

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 Michael P. Harms

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles