World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Psychology

D-Index
68
Citations
18864
World Ranking
2463
National Ranking
1428

Paul A. Estabrooks publication distribution in Psychology in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Psychology in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Paul A. Estabrooks sits on this spectrum.

31–40 publications: 6 scientists 41–50 publications: 52 scientists 51–60 publications: 138 scientists 61–70 publications: 299 scientists 71–80 publications: 461 scientists 81–90 publications: 605 scientists 91–100 publications: 713 scientists 101–110 publications: 736 scientists 111–120 publications: 686 scientists 121–130 publications: 670 scientists 131–140 publications: 644 scientists 141–150 publications: 597 scientists 151–160 publications: 576 scientists 161–170 publications: 477 scientists 171–180 publications: 450 scientists 181–190 publications: 397 scientists 191–200 publications: 343 scientists 201–210 publications: 328 scientists 211–220 publications: 313 scientists 221–230 publications: 283 scientists 231–240 publications: 226 scientists 241–250 publications: 196 scientists 251–260 publications: 201 scientists 261–270 publications: 171 scientists 271–280 publications: 151 scientists 281–290 publications: 139 scientists 291–300 publications: 113 scientists 301–310 publications: 102 scientists 311–320 publications: 100 scientists 321–330 publications: 76 scientists 331–340 publications: 92 scientists 341–350 publications: 85 scientists 351–360 publications: 69 scientists 361–370 publications: 71 scientists 371–380 publications: 63 scientists 381–390 publications: 58 scientists 391–400 publications: 57 scientists 401–410 publications: 43 scientists 411–420 publications: 33 scientists 421–430 publications: 50 scientists 431–440 publications: 41 scientists 441–450 publications: 32 scientists 451–460 publications: 27 scientists 461–470 publications: 28 scientists 471–480 publications: 25 scientists 481–490 publications: 28 scientists 491–500 publications: 20 scientists 501–510 publications: 23 scientists 511–520 publications: 26 scientists 521–530 publications: 17 scientists 531–540 publications: 21 scientists 541–550 publications: 14 scientists 551–560 publications: 16 scientists 561–570 publications: 10 scientists 571–580 publications: 22 scientists 581–590 publications: 9 scientists 591–600 publications: 14 scientists 601–610 publications: 9 scientists 611–620 publications: 11 scientists 621–630 publications: 4 scientists 631–640 publications: 7 scientists 641–650 publications: 5 scientists 651–660 publications: 10 scientists 661–670 publications: 8 scientists 671–680 publications: 8 scientists 681–690 publications: 4 scientists 691–700 publications: 3 scientists 701–704 publications: 4 scientists 705+ publications: 100 scientists
31 publications 705+

This scientist: 284 publications — 86th percentile

86% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more.

Paul A. Estabrooks D-index placement in Psychology in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Psychology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Paul A. Estabrooks sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 398 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 702 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 671 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 659 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 641 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 671 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 617 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 558 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 495 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 487 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 445 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 390 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 408 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 345 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 325 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 321 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 248 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 290 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 218 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 219 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 215 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 183 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 169 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 132 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 137 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 120 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 112 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 86 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 101 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 83 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 77 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 70 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 78 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 58 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 53 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 57 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 48 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 53 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 46 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 24 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 35 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 27 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 32 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 31 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 22 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 16 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 24 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 18 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 11 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 19 scientists 130–131 D-Index: 10 scientists 132–133 D-Index: 16 scientists 134–135 D-Index: 10 scientists 136–137 D-Index: 12 scientists 138–139 D-Index: 8 scientists 140–141 D-Index: 5 scientists 142–143 D-Index: 12 scientists 144+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30 D-Index 144+

This scientist: 68 D-Index — 79th percentile

79% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more.

Overview

Paul A. Estabrooks is affiliated with the University of Nebraska Medical Center in the United States. Their research primarily spans fields related to health professions and medicine, with notable contributions in subfields such as general health professions, public health, environmental and occupational health, physiology, economics and econometrics, and applied psychology.

The scientist's work focuses on topics including health policy implementation science, obesity, physical activity and diet, mobile health and mHealth applications, physical activity and health, obesity and health practices, health systems, economic evaluations, quality of life, and behavioral health and interventions.

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Paul A. Estabrooks include Jennie L. Hill, Tzeyu L. Michaud, Gwenndolyn C. Porter, Caitlin A. Golden, and Kate A. Heelan.

Most publications by the scientist have appeared in the following venues:

  • Frontiers in Public Health
  • Translational Behavioral Medicine
  • Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
  • Childhood Obesity
  • BMJ Open

Recent papers authored or co-authored by Paul A. Estabrooks include:

  • Understanding and applying the RE-AIM framework: Clarifications and resources (2021, Journal of Clinical and Translational Science)
  • A citation analysis and scoping systematic review of the operationalization of the Practical, Robust Implementation and Sustainability Model (PRISM) (2022, Implementation Science)
  • Comparing, Contrasting, and Integrating Dissemination and Implementation Outcomes Included in the RE-AIM and Implementation Outcomes Frameworks (2020, Frontiers in Public Health)
  • Effects of a Digital Diabetes Prevention Program: An RCT (2022, American Journal of Preventive Medicine)
  • Implementation at-scale of school-based physical activity interventions: A systematic review utilizing the RE-AIM framework (2021, Obesity Reviews)

Best Publications

  • RE-AIM Planning and Evaluation Framework: Adapting to New Science and Practice With a 20-Year Review

    Russell E. Glasgow;Samantha M. Harden;Bridget Gaglio;Borsika Rabin;Borsika Rabin

  • Resources for physical activity participation: Does availability and accessibility differ by neighborhood socioeconomic status?

    Paul A. Estabrooks;Rebecca E. Lee;Nancy C. Gyurcsik

  • The future of health behavior change research: what is needed to improve translation of research into health promotion practice?

    Russell E. Glasgow;Lisa M. Klesges;David A. Dzewaltowski;Sheana S. Bull

  • Evaluating the impact of health promotion programs: using the RE-AIM framework to form summary measures for decision making involving complex issues

    Russell E. Glasgow;Lisa M. Klesges;David A. Dzewaltowski;Paul A. Estabrooks

  • Self-Efficacy, Problem Solving, and Social-Environmental Support Are Associated With Diabetes Self-Management Behaviors

    Diane K. King;Russell E. Glasgow;Deborah J. Toobert;Lisa A. Strycker

  • Group Versus Individual Approach? A Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Physical Activity

    Shauna M. Burke;Albert V. Carron;Mark A. Eys;Nikos Ntoumanis

  • Beginning with the application in mind: Designing and planning health behavior change interventions to enhance dissemination

    Lisa M. Klesges;Paul A. Estabrooks;David A. Dzewaltowski;Sheana S. Bull

  • Implementation and scale up of population physical activity interventions for clinical and community settings: the PRACTIS guide.

    Harriet Koorts;Elizabeth Eakin;Paul A Estabrooks;Anna Timperio

  • A systematic literature review and meta-analysis: The Theory of Planned Behavior's application to understand and predict nutrition-related behaviors in youth

    Shaun K. Riebl;Paul A. Estabrooks;Paul A. Estabrooks;Julie C. Dunsmore;Jyoti Savla

  • Twelve-month outcomes of an Internet-based diabetes self-management support program

    R. E. Glasgow;R. E. Glasgow;D. Kurz;D. King;J. M. Dickman

  • The Psychology of Physical Activity

    Albert V. Carron;Heather A. Hausenblas;Paul A. Estabrooks

  • Health Literacy is associated with Healthy Eating Index Scores and Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Intake: Findings from the Rural Lower Mississippi Delta

    Jamie Zoellner;Wen You;Carol Connell;Renae L. Smith-Ray

  • Engagement in a diabetes self-management website: usage patterns and generalizability of program use

    Russell E. Glasgow;Steven M Christiansen;Deanna Kurz;Diane K King

  • Physical activity promotion through primary care.

    Paul A. Estabrooks;Russell E. Glasgow;David A. Dzewaltowski

  • RE-AIM: evidence-based standards and a Web resource to improve translation of research into practice.

    David A. Dzewaltowski;Russell E. Glasgow;Lisa M. Klesges;Paul A. Estabrooks

  • Validation of a survey instrument to assess home environments for physical activity and healthy eating in overweight children

    Michelle L Gattshall;Jo Ann Shoup;Julie A Marshall;Lori A Crane

  • Behavior change intervention research in community settings: how generalizable are the results?

    David A. Dzewaltowski;Paula A. Estabrooks;Lisa M. Klesges;Sheana Bull

  • Group cohesion in older adult exercisers: prediction and intervention effects.

    Paul A. Estabrooks;Albert V. Carron

  • RE-AIM in the Real World: Use of the RE-AIM Framework for Program Planning and Evaluation in Clinical and Community Settings.

    Bethany M. Kwan;Hannah L. McGinnes;Marcia G. Ory;Paul A. Estabrooks

  • Fidelity to and comparative results across behavioral interventions evaluated through the RE-AIM framework: a systematic review.

    Samantha M. Harden;Bridget Gaglio;Jo Ann Shoup;Jo Ann Shoup;Kimberlee A. Kinney

  • The future of physical activity behavior change research: what is needed to improve translation of research into health promotion practice?

    David A. Dzewaltowski;Paul A. Estabrooks;Russell E. Glasgow

  • The Effectiveness and Cost of Lifestyle Interventions Including Nutrition Education for Diabetes Prevention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

    Yu Sun;Wen You;Fabio Almeida;Paul A Estabrooks

  • The Physical Activity Group Environment Questionnaire: An Instrument for the Assessment of Cohesion in Exercise Classes

    Paul A. Estabrooks;Albert V. Carron

  • Translating Effective Clinic-Based Physical Activity Interventions into Practice

    Paul A. Estabrooks;Russell E. Glasgow

Frequent Co-Authors

Russell E. Glasgow
Russell E. Glasgow University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
David A. Dzewaltowski
David A. Dzewaltowski University of Nebraska Medical Center
Albert V. Carron
Albert V. Carron University of Western Ontario
Rebecca E. Lee
Rebecca E. Lee Arizona State University
Marcia G. Ory
Marcia G. Ory Texas A&M University
Lisa M. Klesges
Lisa M. Klesges Washington University in St. Louis
Lisa A. Strycker
Lisa A. Strycker Oregon Research Institute
Sheana Bull
Sheana Bull University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Kevin S. Spink
Kevin S. Spink University of Saskatchewan
Mark R. Beauchamp
Mark R. Beauchamp University of British Columbia

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 Psychology in the USA opens doors to a variety of online degrees and career pathways. Many students find that psychology studies provide a strong foundation for specialized fields such as Speech-Language Pathology (SLP), counseling, or educational psychology.

The demand for certified speech therapists continues to grow nationwide. For instance, those interested in becoming a speech therapist in Maine must meet specific state licensure requirements, which often include a master’s degree and supervised clinical experience. Similarly, Maryland speech pathologist certification requirements emphasize a combination of academic credentials, examination, and practical training.

If you’re considering becoming a speech therapist in Massachusetts, you’ll find comparable requirements, including approved graduate programs and clinical hours. Meanwhile, Michigan slp certification requirements focus on accredited education along with a state exam.

Many accredited online psychology programs offer pathways into these professions, providing the flexibility and foundational knowledge needed to transition into roles where you can make a real impact.

Best Scientists Citing Paul A. Estabrooks

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles