World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
82
Citations
41036
World Ranking
15861
National Ranking
1458

Nick Black 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 Nick Black 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: 451 publications — 49th percentile

49% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Nick Black 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 Nick Black 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: 82 D-Index — 21st percentile

21% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Nick Black is affiliated with the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily focuses on Medicine, with notable subfields including Economics and Econometrics, Emergency Medicine, General Health Professions, Epidemiology, and Psychiatry and Mental Health.

Their work covers several main topics such as Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life; Emergency and Acute Care Studies; Delphi Technique in Research; Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation; Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment; Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research; and Health Disparities and Outcomes.

Nick Black has published in a variety of scientific journals. Frequent publication venues include:

  • BMC Health Services Research
  • Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
  • BMC Public Health
  • British Journal of Surgery
  • Patient Related Outcome Measures

Recent papers authored or co-authored by Nick Black include:

  • Type of Track and Trigger system and incidence of in-hospital cardiac arrest: an observational registry-based study, 2020, BMC Health Services Research
  • Proxy reporting of health-related quality of life for people with dementia: a psychometric solution, 2020, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
  • A core outcome set for randomised controlled trials of physical activity interventions: development and challenges, 2022, BMC Public Health
  • From opera buffa to opera seria: anniversaries of Royal College of Surgeons of England research initiatives, 2023, British Journal of Surgery
  • Can Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) from Population Surveys Provide Accurate Estimates of Pre-Admission Health Status of Emergency Hospital Admissions?, 2020, Patient Related Outcome Measures

Nick Black often collaborates with several researchers, including:

  • M. Nickie Coomer
  • Dion Morton
  • Sarah C. Smith
  • Peter J. Hutchinson
  • Thomas Pinkney

Best Publications

  • The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions.

    Sara H Downs;Nick Black

  • Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care

    Nick Black

  • Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development.

    M K Murphy;N A Black;D L Lamping;C M McKee

  • Patient reported outcome measures could help transform healthcare.

    Nick Black

  • Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development: a review

    Murphy E;Black N;Lamping D;Mckee C

  • Evidence based policy: proceed with care.

    Nick Black

  • Epidemiology of severe sepsis occurring in the first 24 hrs in intensive care units in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland.

    Andrew Padkin;Caroline Goldfrad;Anthony R. Brady;Duncan Young

  • How do patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) support clinician-patient communication and patient care? A realist synthesis

    Joanne Greenhalgh;Kate Gooding;Kate Gooding;Elizabeth Gibbons;Sonia Dalkin;Sonia Dalkin

  • Consensus development methods: a review of best practice in creating clinical guidelines

    Nick Black;Maggie Murphy;Donna Lamping;Martin McKee

  • Methods in health services research. Interpreting the evidence: choosing between randomised and non-randomised studies

    Martin McKee;Annie Britton;Nick Black;Klim McPherson

  • Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers'recommendations: a randomised trial

    S. van Rooyen;Fiona Godlee;S. Evans;N. Black

  • Why we need qualitative research.

    N Black

  • Preventable deaths due to problems in care in English acute hospitals: a retrospective case record review study

    Helen Hogan;Frances Healey;Graham Neale;Richard Thomson

  • Choosing between randomised and non-randomised studies: a systematic review.

    A Britton;M McKee;N Black;K McPherson

  • Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review

    S. van Rooyen;Fiona Godlee;S. Evans;R. Smith

  • An open letter to The BMJ editors on qualitative research

    Trisha Greenhalgh;Ellen Annandale;Richard Ashcroft;James Barlow

  • Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review: A randomized trial

    S van Rooyen;F Godlee;S Evans;R Smith

  • Threats to applicability of randomised trials: exclusions and selective participation

    Annie Britton;Martin McKee;Nick Black;Klim McPherson

  • What Makes a Good Reviewer and a Good Review for a General Medical Journal

    Nick Black;Susan van Rooyen;Fiona Godlee;Richard Smith

  • The effectiveness of surgery for stress incontinence in women: a systematic review

    N.A. Black;S.H. Downs

Frequent Co-Authors

Nicholas Mays
Nicholas Mays London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
Martin McKee
Martin McKee London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
Jan van der Meulen
Jan van der Meulen University of London
Joanne Greenhalgh
Joanne Greenhalgh University of Leeds
Naomi Fulop
Naomi Fulop University College London
Ray Pawson
Ray Pawson University of Leeds
Klim McPherson
Klim McPherson University of Oxford
Pauline Allen
Pauline Allen University of London
Stephen Evans
Stephen Evans University of London
Tom Sensky
Tom Sensky Imperial College London

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

Pursuing a degree in Medicine opens the door to many dynamic online options for advancing your healthcare career or exploring related fields. For registered nurses, asn to nurse practitioner programs offer a streamlined path from an associate degree in nursing to a graduate-level nurse practitioner role, often with flexible online study.

Those interested in health and wellness may consider an online bs in nutrition, which prepares graduates for diverse careers in dietetics, public health, and nutrition consulting.

Aspiring healthcare administrators have the option to enroll in accredited mha programs online, providing rigorous preparation for leadership roles in hospitals, clinics, and healthcare organizations.

Additionally, working RNs seeking career advancement can find rn to bsn without clinicals programs, which allow them to complete their bachelor’s degree fully online—ideal for those balancing work and study.

Best Scientists Citing Nick Black

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles