World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
104
Citations
144539
World Ranking
6867
National Ranking
3623

Mohsen Naghavi 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 Mohsen Naghavi 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: 240 publications — 7th percentile

7% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Mohsen Naghavi 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 Mohsen Naghavi 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: 104 D-Index — 66th percentile

66% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Mohsen Naghavi is affiliated with the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation in the United States. Their research primarily spans the field of Medicine, with a concentration in subfields such as General Health Professions, Epidemiology, Oncology, Health, and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health.

The scientist's work covers several major topics, including:

  • Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
  • Global Health Care Issues
  • Global Maternal and Child Health
  • Climate Change and Health Impacts
  • Health Disparities and Outcomes
  • Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
  • Antibiotic Resistance in Bacteria

Frequent coauthors collaborating with Mohsen Naghavi include:

  • Christopher J L Murray
  • Simon I Hay
  • Ali H. Mokdad
  • Déborah Carvalho Malta
  • Bruce Bartholow Duncan

The scientist's research is often published in journals such as:

  • Population Health Metrics
  • The Lancet
  • Revista da Sociedade Brasileira de Medicina Tropical
  • Injury Prevention
  • Archives of Iranian Medicine

Selected recent papers authored or coauthored by Mohsen Naghavi include:

  • Global, regional, and national burden of congenital heart disease, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017 (2020), The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health
  • Global burden of 288 causes of death and life expectancy decomposition in 204 countries and territories and 811 subnational locations, 1990-2021: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021 (2024), The Lancet

Other notable papers where Mohsen Naghavi contributed as an author include works published in The Lancet and JAMA, focusing on global sepsis incidence and mortality, and health care spending in the United States, reflecting interdisciplinary engagements in public health research.

Best Publications

  • Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013

    Marie Ng;Tom P Fleming;Margaret W. Robinson;Blake Thomson

  • Disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for 291 diseases and injuries in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010

    Christopher J.L. Murray;Theo Vos;Rafael Lozano;Mohsen Naghavi

  • Years lived with disability (YLDs) for 1160 sequelae of 289 diseases and injuries 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010

    Theo Vos;Abraham D. Flaxman;Mohsen Naghavi;Rafael Lozano

  • Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 301 acute and chronic diseases and injuries in 188 countries, 1990-2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013

    Theo Vos;Ryan M. Barber;Brad Bell;Amelia Bertozzi-Villa

  • Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 310 diseases and injuries, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

    Theo Vos;Christine Allen;Megha Arora;Ryan M Barber

  • Global, regional, and national age-sex specific mortality for 264 causes of death, 1980–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

    Mohsen Naghavi;Amanuel Alemu Abajobir;Cristiana Abbafati;Kaja M Abbas

  • Worldwide Epidemiology of Atrial Fibrillation: A Global Burden of Disease 2010 Study

    Sumeet S. Chugh;Rasmus Havmoeller;Kumar Narayanan;David Singh

  • Global and regional burden of stroke during 1990–2010: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010

    Valery L Feigin;Mohammad H Forouzanfar;Rita Krishnamurthi;George A Mensah

  • Global, regional, and national sepsis incidence and mortality, 1990–2017: analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study

    Kristina E Rudd;Sarah Charlotte Johnson;Kareha M Agesa;Katya Anne Shackelford

  • Mortality, morbidity, and risk factors in China and its provinces, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

    Maigeng Zhou;Haidong Wang;Xinying Zeng;Peng Yin

  • Global, regional, and national burden of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

    Emma Nichols;Cassandra E.I. Szoeke;Stein Emil Vollset;Nooshin Abbasi

  • The global, regional, and national burden of inflammatory bowel disease in 195 countries and territories, 1990-2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017

    Sudabeh Alatab;Sadaf G Sepanlou;Kevin Ikuta;Homayoon Vahedi

  • A systematic analysis of global anemia burden from 1990 to 2010

    Nicholas J. Kassebaum;Nicholas J. Kassebaum;Rashmi Jasrasaria;Mohsen Naghavi;Sarah K. Wulf

  • Global, regional, and national burden of Parkinson's disease, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

    E. Ray Dorsey;Alexis Elbaz;Emma Nichols;Foad Abd-Allah

  • Global malaria mortality between 1980 and 2010: a systematic analysis

    Christopher J L Murray;Lisa C Rosenfeld;Stephen S Lim;Kathryn G Andrews

  • Global, regional, and national disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 315 diseases and injuries and healthy life expectancy (HALE), 1990-2015 : a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015

    Nicholas J. Kassebaum;Megha Arora;Ryan M. Barber;Zulfiqar A. Bhutta;Zulfiqar A. Bhutta

  • Global burden of oral conditions in 1990-2010: a systematic analysis

    W Marcenes;N J Kassebaum;Eduardo Bernabe;A Flaxman

  • Common values in assessing health outcomes from disease and injury: disability weights measurement study for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010.

    Joshua A. Salomon;Theo Vos;Daniel R. Hogan;Michael Gagnon

  • The Global Burden of Skin Disease in 2010: An Analysis of the Prevalence and Impact of Skin Conditions

    Roderick J. Hay;Nicole E. Johns;Hywel C. Williams;Ian W. Bolliger

  • Global burden of stroke and risk factors in 188 countries, during 1990-2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013.

    Valery L Feigin;Gregory A Roth;Mohsen Naghavi;Priya Parmar

Frequent Co-Authors

Majid Ezzati
Majid Ezzati Imperial College London
Stein Emil Vollset
Stein Emil Vollset University of Washington
Peter Burney
Peter Burney Imperial College London
Anthony D. Woolf
Anthony D. Woolf Royal Cornwall Hospital
Traolach S. Brugha
Traolach S. Brugha University of Leicester
Valery L. Feigin
Valery L. Feigin Auckland University of Technology
Kevin A. Fenton
Kevin A. Fenton Public Health England
Guoqing Hu
Guoqing Hu Central South University
Nigel Bruce
Nigel Bruce University of Liverpool
Carol Brayne
Carol Brayne 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

If you’re considering a future in medicine but seek alternative or complementary career routes, there are several online options to explore. For those interested in nursing, one path to consider is the online direct entry msn. This accelerated program is designed for non-nurses with a bachelor’s degree in another field and allows a faster pathway into advanced nursing roles.

Aspiring nurses might also look into the easiest rn program to get into, which can increase your chances of acceptance without compromising on education quality. Additionally, some institutions offer a nursing school that does not require teas test, removing key standardized testing barriers from the application process.

Beyond direct patient care, you can enter the healthcare field through an administrative path. Consider accredited medical billing and coding online schools for flexible learning and opportunities to work behind the scenes supporting patient care. Each of these options offers unique advantages for those seeking flexibility and multiple entry points into the healthcare industry.

Best Scientists Citing Mohsen Naghavi

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles