World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
41
Citations
8368
World Ranking
7788
National Ranking
57

Nina Forss 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 Nina Forss 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: 130 publications — 33rd percentile

33% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Nina Forss 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 Nina Forss 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: 41 D-Index — 19th percentile

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

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

Overview

Nina Forss is affiliated with the University of Helsinki in Finland and has a research focus primarily in Medicine and Neuroscience. Their work spans several subfields including Cognitive Neuroscience, Epidemiology, Neurology, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, and Internal Medicine. The scientist's research covers diverse topics such as EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces, Acute Ischemic Stroke Management, Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances, Cerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases, Neural dynamics and brain function, Functional Brain Connectivity Studies, and Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management.

Forss has contributed to multiple recent papers published in notable venues. These include:

  • Comparing MEG and EEG in detecting the ~20-Hz rhythm modulation to tactile and proprioceptive stimulation, 2020, NeuroImage
  • Reproducibility of Rolandic beta rhythm modulation in MEG and EEG, 2022, Journal of Neurophysiology
  • The effect of alertness and attention on the modulation of the beta rhythm to tactile stimulation, 2021, Physiological Reports
  • Using normative modeling and machine learning for detecting mild traumatic brain injury from magnetoencephalography data, 2023, PLoS Computational Biology
  • Comparative analysis of core and perfusion lesion volumes between commercially available computed tomography perfusion software, 2022, European Stroke Journal

Frequently collaborating with other researchers, Forss often coauthors with Kristina Laaksonen, Olli Suomalainen, Nicolas Martinez-Majander, Sami Curtze, and Marjaana Tiainen. These partnerships reflect a consistent collaborative approach in their research activities.

Research findings have been disseminated through various scientific journals. Forss has multiple publications in the Journal of the Neurological Sciences, NeuroImage Clinical, bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), NeuroImage, and the Journal of Neurophysiology. This range of publication venues supports a multidisciplinary engagement with both clinical and experimental neuroscience fields.

Best Publications

  • Activation of human primary motor cortex during action observation: A neuromagnetic study

    R. Hari;N. Forss;S. Avikainen;E. Kirveskari

  • Altered central sensorimotor processing in patients with complex regional pain syndrome

    Kirsi Juottonen;Maarit Gockel;Teija Silén;Heikki Hurri

  • Magnetoencephalography in the study of human somatosensory cortical processing

    Riitta Hari;Riitta Hari;N. Forss

  • Symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage after stroke thrombolysis: The SEDAN Score

    Daniel Strbian;Stefan Engelter;Patrik Michel;Atte Meretoja

  • Activation of a distributed somatosensory cortical network in the human brain. A dipole modelling study of magnetic fields evoked by median nerve stimulation. Part I: Location and activation timing of SEF sources.

    F Mauguière;I Merlet;N Forss;S Vanni

  • Activation of the human posterior parietal cortex by median nerve stimulation

    N. Forss;R. Hari;R. Salmelin;A. Ahonen

  • Modulated Activation of the Human SI and SII Cortices during Observation of Hand Actions

    Sari Avikainen;Nina Forss;Riitta Hari;Riitta Hari

  • Bilateral activation of the human somatomotor cortex by distal hand movements.

    R. Salmelin;N. Forss;J. Knuutila;R. Hari

  • Aberrant temporal and spatial brain activity during rest in patients with chronic pain

    Sanna Malinen;Nuutti Vartiainen;Yevhen Hlushchuk;Miika Koskinen

  • Modified activation of somatosensory cortical network in patients with right-hemisphere stroke.

    Nina Forss;Marja Hietanen;Oili Salonen;Riitta Hari

  • Activation of a distributed somatosensory cortical network in the human brain: a dipole modelling study of magnetic fields evoked by median nerve stimulation. Part II: effects of stimulus rate, attention and stimulus detection

    F Mauguière;I Merlet;N Forss;S Vanni

  • Comparison of somatosensory evoked fields to airpuff and electric stimuli

    N. Forss;R. Salmelin;R. Hari

  • IFCN-endorsed practical guidelines for clinical magnetoencephalography (MEG).

    Riitta Hari;Sylvain Baillet;Gareth Barnes;Richard Burgess

  • Magnetoencephalography in neurosurgery.

    Jyrki P Mäkelä;Nina Forss;Juha Jääskeläinen;Erika Kirveskari

  • Three hands: Fragmentation of human bodily awareness

    Riitta Hari;Riitta Hari;Ritva Hänninen;Timo Mäkinen;Veikko Jousmäki

  • Sensorimotor integration in human primary and secondary somatosensory cortices.

    Nina Forss;Veikko Jousmäki

  • Cortical reorganization in primary somatosensory cortex in patients with unilateral chronic pain.

    Nuutti Vartiainen;Erika Kirveskari;Erika Kirveskari;Katariina Kallio-Laine;Eija Kalso

  • Three-dimensional integration of brain anatomy and function to facilitate intraoperative navigation around the sensorimotor strip.

    Jyrki P. Mäkelä;Erika Kirveskari;Mika Seppä;Matti Hämäläinen

  • Activation of the human posterior parietal and temporoparietal cortices during audiotactile interaction.

    René Gobbelé;Martin Schürmann;Nina Forss;K. Juottonen

  • Common cortical network for first and second pain

    Nina Forss;Tuukka T. Raij;Mika Seppä;Riitta Hari;Riitta Hari

Frequent Co-Authors

Riitta Hari
Riitta Hari Aalto University
Veikko Jousmäki
Veikko Jousmäki Aalto University
Turgut Tatlisumak
Turgut Tatlisumak University of Gothenburg
Jyrki P. Mäkelä
Jyrki P. Mäkelä University of Helsinki
Markku Kaste
Markku Kaste University of Helsinki
Eija Kalso
Eija Kalso University of Helsinki
Oili Salonen
Oili Salonen University of Helsinki
Matti Hämäläinen
Matti Hämäläinen Harvard Medical School
François Mauguière
François Mauguière Claude Bernard University Lyon 1
Lauri Parkkonen
Lauri Parkkonen Aalto University

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 Neuroscience opens doors to a variety of related academic and career opportunities. For those seeking flexibility and speed, many students now consider accelerated degrees online, which allow you to earn your qualifications faster from the comfort of home.

The interdisciplinary nature of Neuroscience makes graduates strong candidates for some of the best degrees in the world. Fields like bioengineering, computer science, and psychology often overlap with neuroscience, and these are recognized among the highest paying majors across the U.S.

Financing your education is another key concern. Students searching for affordable options can explore a range of online colleges that accept financial aid and offer reputable neuroscience-related programs.

By identifying the right online degree and career pathway, you position yourself for success in neuroscience or related high-demand fields.

Best Scientists Citing Nina Forss

Trending Scientists