World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
68
Citations
23629
World Ranking
2712
National Ranking
1267

Pablo Celnik 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 Pablo Celnik 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: 181 publications — 56th percentile

56% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Pablo Celnik 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 Pablo Celnik 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: 68 D-Index — 72nd percentile

72% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Pablo Celnik is affiliated with Johns Hopkins University in the United States and has an extensive publication record primarily in the fields of Neuroscience and Medicine. Their research focuses significantly on Neurology, Cognitive Neuroscience, and Rehabilitation, as well as Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience and Biomedical Engineering.

The scientist's research addresses topics including Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies, EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces, Muscle Activation and Electromyography Studies, Neuroscience and Neural Engineering, Motor Control and Adaptation, and Vestibular and Auditory Disorders.

Frequent coauthors collaborating with Pablo Celnik are:

  • Manuel A. Anaya
  • Gabriela Cantarero
  • Luke E. Osborn
  • Matthew S. Fifer
  • Francesco V. Tenore

Their work has been published in a variety of venues, with several recurrent journals including:

  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • Brain stimulation
  • Neurorehabilitation and neural repair
  • American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
  • Clinical Neurophysiology

Among the recent papers authored or coauthored by Pablo Celnik are:

  • Multiple Motor Learning Processes in Humans: Defining Their Neurophysiological Bases, 2020, The Neuroscientist
  • Effect of Ezogabine on Cortical and Spinal Motor Neuron Excitability in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, 2020, JAMA Neurology
  • Comparing a Novel Neuroanimation Experience to Conventional Therapy for High-Dose Intensive Upper-Limb Training in Subacute Stroke: The SMARTS2 Randomized Trial, 2021, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair
  • Cerebellar-Motor Cortex Connectivity: One or Two Different Networks?, 2020, Journal of Neuroscience
  • Training in the practice of noninvasive brain stimulation: Recommendations from an IFCN committee, 2020, Clinical Neurophysiology

Best Publications

  • Depression of motor cortex excitability by low-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation.

    R. Chen;J. Classen;C. Gerloff;P. Celnik

  • Noninvasive cortical stimulation enhances motor skill acquisition over multiple days through an effect on consolidation

    Janine Reis;Heidi M. Schambra;Leonardo G. Cohen;Ethan R. Buch

  • Stroke Rehabilitation.

    Unknown

  • A technical guide to tDCS, and related non-invasive brain stimulation tools

    A.J. Woods;A. Antal;M. Bikson;P.S. Boggio

  • Effects of non-invasive cortical stimulation on skilled motor function in chronic stroke

    Friedhelm Hummel;Pablo Celnik;Pascal Giraux;Agnes Floel

  • Functional relevance of cross-modal plasticity in blind humans

    Leonardo G. Cohen;Pablo Celnik;Alvaro Pascual-Leone;Alvaro Pascual-Leone;Brian Corwell

  • Dissociating the Roles of the Cerebellum and Motor Cortex during Adaptive Learning: The Motor Cortex Retains What the Cerebellum Learns

    Joseph M. Galea;Alejandro Vazquez;Neel Pasricha;Jean Jacques Orban De Xivry

  • Formation of a motor memory by action observation.

    Katja Stefan;Leonardo G. Cohen;Julie Duque;Riccardo Mazzocchio

  • Modulation of Cerebellar Excitability by Polarity-Specific Noninvasive Direct Current Stimulation

    Joseph M. Galea;Gowri Jayaram;Loni Ajagbe;Pablo Celnik

  • Period of susceptibility for cross-modal plasticity in the blind

    Leonardo G. Cohen;Robert A. Weeks;Norihiro Sadato;Pablo Celnik

  • Transcallosal inhibition in chronic subcortical stroke

    Julie Duque;Friedhelm Hummel;Pablo Celnik;Nagako Murase;Nagako Murase

  • Effects of tDCS on motor learning and memory formation: A consensus and critical position paper

    Ethan R. Buch;Emiliano Santarnecchi;Andrea Antal;Jan Born

  • Effects of Action Observation on Physical Training After Stroke

    Pablo Celnik;Brian Webster;Davis M. Glasser;Leonardo G. Cohen

  • Somatosensory stimulation enhances the effects of training functional hand tasks in patients with chronic stroke

    Pablo Celnik;Friedhelm Hummel;Friedhelm Hummel;Michelle Harris-Love;Rebecca Wolk

  • Modulating locomotor adaptation with cerebellar stimulation

    Gowri Jayaram;Byron Tang;Rani Pallegadda;Erin Virgina Lamont Vasudevan

  • Non-invasive Cerebellar Stimulation—a Consensus Paper

    G Grimaldi;GP Argyropoulos;A Boehringer;Pablo Celnik

  • Effects of brain polarization on reaction times and pinch force in chronic stroke

    Friedhelm C Hummel;Friedhelm C Hummel;Bernhard Voller;Pablo Celnik;Agnes Floel

  • Intermanual Differences in Movement-related Interhemispheric Inhibition

    Julie Duque;Nagako Murase;Pablo Celnik;Friedhelm Hummel

  • Consensus: Can transcranial direct current stimulation and transcranial magnetic stimulation enhance motor learning and memory formation?

    Janine Reis;Edwin M. Robertson;John W. Krakauer;John Rothwell

  • Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (ctDCS) A Novel Approach to Understanding Cerebellar Function in Health and Disease

    Giuliana Grimaldi;Georgios P. Argyropoulos;Amy Bastian;Mar Cortes

  • Effects of Combined Peripheral Nerve Stimulation and Brain Polarization on Performance of a Motor Sequence Task After Chronic Stroke

    Pablo Celnik;Nam Jong Paik;Yves Vandermeeren;Yves Vandermeeren;Michael Dimyan

Frequent Co-Authors

Leonardo G. Cohen
Leonardo G. Cohen National Institutes of Health
Amy J. Bastian
Amy J. Bastian Kennedy Krieger Institute
Friedhelm C. Hummel
Friedhelm C. Hummel École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
John W. Krakauer
John W. Krakauer Johns Hopkins University
Joseph M. Galea
Joseph M. Galea University of Birmingham
Jörn Diedrichsen
Jörn Diedrichsen University of Western Ontario
Joseph Classen
Joseph Classen Leipzig University
Mark Hallett
Mark Hallett National Institutes of Health
Christian Gerloff
Christian Gerloff University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf
Martin A. Lindquist
Martin A. Lindquist Johns Hopkins 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

Studying neuroscience in the USA can open doors to a range of impactful and rewarding careers. Many students interested in understanding the human mind also explore msw programs, which prepare graduates for meaningful roles in social work and mental health support.

Those looking to specialize in behavioral analysis and intervention may seek bcba certification. This credential is essential for careers in applied behavior analysis, particularly supporting individuals with autism and developmental disorders.

For students wishing to accelerate their educational journey without compromising quality, msw programs and psychology degree online options are available. These online pathways offer flexibility and affordability, making advanced study accessible for working professionals and recent graduates alike.

Whether your interests lie in research, social work, clinical psychology, or behavioral analysis, these related online degree pathways can help you build a versatile career foundation in neuroscience and its allied fields.

Best Scientists Citing Pablo Celnik

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles