World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 88 13004 12240 6646 6147 351 34634

Peggy M. Cawthon publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Peggy M. Cawthon between 2005 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Peggy M. Cawthon published across 21 years, from 2005 to 2025, averaging 27.4 papers a year. Output peaked at 114 publications in 2023. 124 of the 576 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
25 50 75 100
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2005 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 114. Peak 114 publications in 2023. 2005: 2 publications 2006: 3 publications 2007: 6 publications 2008: 3 publications 2009: 11 publications 2010: 12 publications 2011: 17 publications 2012: 10 publications 2013: 10 publications 2014: 25 publications 2015: 15 publications 2016: 28 publications 2017: 40 publications 2018: 29 publications 2019: 18 publications 2020: 34 publications 2021: 24 publications 2022: 51 publications 2023: 114 publications 2024: 85 publications 2025: 39 publications
2005 2025

576 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Peggy M. Cawthon: publications per year, 2005 to 2025
Year Publications
2005 2
2006 3
2007 6
2008 3
2009 11
2010 12
2011 17
2012 10
2013 10
2014 25
2015 15
2016 28
2017 40
2018 29
2019 18
2020 34
2021 24
2022 51
2023 114
2024 85
2025 39
Total 576
Download as CSV

Peggy M. Cawthon 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 Peggy M. Cawthon sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600 800
Bar chart with 86 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 101–120 to 1,796+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 922. Most scientists, 922, have 341–360 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 341–360 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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: 610 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
101–120 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 351 publications — 28th percentile

28% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
101–120 5
121–140 26
141–160 73
161–180 155
181–200 230
201–220 363
221–240 487
241–260 545
261–280 722
281–300 768
301–320 834
321–340 895
341–360 922 351
361–380 838
381–400 861
401–420 918
421–440 806
441–460 771
461–480 751
481–500 713
501–520 617
521–540 610
541–560 537
561–580 504
581–600 509
601–620 396
621–640 386
641–660 371
661–680 340
681–700 336
701–720 307
721–740 259
741–760 230
761–780 228
781–800 217
801–820 204
821–840 186
841–860 177
861–880 155
881–900 139
901–920 145
921–940 116
941–960 133
961–980 91
981–1,000 96
1,001–1,020 77
1,021–1,040 70
1,041–1,060 63
1,061–1,080 77
1,081–1,100 49
1,101–1,120 54
1,121–1,140 49
1,141–1,160 51
1,161–1,180 35
1,181–1,200 39
1,201–1,220 26
1,221–1,240 37
1,241–1,260 36
1,261–1,280 27
1,281–1,300 32
1,301–1,320 28
1,321–1,340 17
1,341–1,360 30
1,361–1,380 28
1,381–1,400 17
1,401–1,420 21
1,421–1,440 15
1,441–1,460 12
1,461–1,480 12
1,481–1,500 18
1,501–1,520 14
1,521–1,540 17
1,541–1,560 15
1,561–1,580 6
1,581–1,600 2
1,601–1,620 12
1,621–1,640 11
1,641–1,660 8
1,661–1,680 5
1,681–1,700 5
1,701–1,720 10
1,721–1,740 12
1,741–1,760 14
1,761–1,780 6
1,781–1,795 5
1,796+ 100
Download as CSV

Peggy M. Cawthon 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 Peggy M. Cawthon sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
250 500 750 1,000
Bar chart with 75 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 70–71 to 217+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 1,027. Most scientists, 1,027, have 82–83 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 88–89 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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: 399 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
70–71 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 88 D-Index — 36th percentile

36% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
70–71 226
72–73 391
74–75 574
76–77 730
78–79 891
80–81 972
82–83 1,027
84–85 1,003
86–87 960
88–89 970 88
90–91 922
92–93 839
94–95 808
96–97 779
98–99 668
100–101 611
102–103 630
104–105 513
106–107 541
108–109 445
110–111 429
112–113 399
114–115 393
116–117 318
118–119 302
120–121 287
122–123 255
124–125 256
126–127 252
128–129 230
130–131 179
132–133 168
134–135 163
136–137 159
138–139 134
140–141 134
142–143 118
144–145 109
146–147 106
148–149 74
150–151 79
152–153 80
154–155 87
156–157 57
158–159 74
160–161 69
162–163 60
164–165 53
166–167 39
168–169 42
170–171 32
172–173 39
174–175 40
176–177 28
178–179 19
180–181 23
182–183 31
184–185 18
186–187 20
188–189 22
190–191 13
192–193 21
194–195 12
196–197 12
198–199 14
200–201 15
202–203 13
204–205 10
206–207 8
208–209 4
210–211 12
212–213 11
214–215 10
216 4
217+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

Peggy M. Cawthon is affiliated with the University of California, San Francisco in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on medical science, with significant contributions in physiology, orthopedics and sports medicine, surgery, geriatrics and gerontology, and molecular biology.

The main topics addressed in their research include nutrition and health in aging, body composition measurement techniques, frailty in older adults, bone health and osteoporosis research, cardiovascular and exercise physiology, physical activity and health, as well as cerebral palsy and movement disorders.

Among recent papers authored or co-authored by Peggy M. Cawthon are:

  • Sarcopenia Definition: The Position Statements of the Sarcopenia Definition and Outcomes Consortium (2020) published in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
  • Sarcopenia and Cardiovascular Diseases (2023) published in Circulation
  • The Conceptual Definition of Sarcopenia: Delphi Consensus from the Global Leadership Initiative in Sarcopenia (GLIS) (2024) published in Age and Ageing
  • Supplemental Vitamin D and Incident Fractures in Midlife and Older Adults (2022) published in the New England Journal of Medicine
  • Putative Cut-Points in Sarcopenia Components and Incident Adverse Health Outcomes: An SDOC Analysis (2020) published in the Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Peggy M. Cawthon include:

  • Anne B. Newman
  • Steven R. Cummings
  • Stephen B. Kritchevsky
  • Paul M. Coen
  • Jane A. Cauley

The most common publication venues for their work are:

  • Innovation in Aging
  • The Journals of Gerontology Series A
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
  • Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise

Best Publications

  • Gait speed and survival in older adults.

    Stephanie Studenski;Subashan Perera;Kushang Patel;Caterina Rosano

  • The FNIH Sarcopenia Project: Rationale, Study Description, Conference Recommendations, and Final Estimates

    Stephanie A. Studenski;Katherine W. Peters;Dawn E. Alley;Peggy M. Cawthon

  • Sarcopenia: etiology, clinical consequences, intervention, and assessment

    T Lang;T Streeper;P Cawthon;K Baldwin

  • Comparison of 2 Frailty Indexes for Prediction of Falls, Disability, Fractures, and Death in Older Women

    Kristine E. Ensrud;Susan K. Ewing;Brent C. Taylor;Howard A. Fink

  • Short Physical Performance Battery and all-cause mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis

    Rita Pavasini;Jack M. Guralnik;Justin C. Brown;Mauro Di Bari

  • Frailty and Risk of Falls, Fracture, and Mortality in Older Women: The Study of Osteoporotic Fractures

    Kristine E. Ensrud;Kristine E. Ensrud;Susan K. Ewing;Brent C. Taylor;Howard A. Fink;Howard A. Fink

  • Design and baseline characteristics of the osteoporotic fractures in men (MrOS) study — A large observational study of the determinants of fracture in older men

    Eric Orwoll;Janet Babich Blank;Elizabeth Barrett-Connor;Jane Cauley

  • A Comparison of Frailty Indexes for the Prediction of Falls, Disability, Fractures and Mortality in Older Men

    Kristine E. Ensrud;Kristine E. Ensrud;Kristine E. Ensrud;Susan K. Ewing;Peggy M. Cawthon;Howard A. Fink;Howard A. Fink

  • Frailty in Older Men: Prevalence, Progression, and Relationship with Mortality

    Peggy M. Cawthon;Lynn M. Marshall;Yvonne Michael;Thuy Tien Dam

  • Grip Strength Cutpoints for the Identification of Clinically Relevant Weakness

    Dawn E. Alley;Michelle D. Shardell;Katherine W. Peters;Robert R. McLean

  • Overview of recruitment for the osteoporotic fractures in men study (MrOS)

    Janet Babich Blank;Peggy Mannen Cawthon;Mary Lou Carrion-Petersen;Loretta Harper

  • Criteria for Clinically Relevant Weakness and Low Lean Mass and Their Longitudinal Association With Incident Mobility Impairment and Mortality: The Foundation for the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) Sarcopenia Project

    Robert R. McLean;Michelle D. Shardell;Dawn E. Alley;Peggy M. Cawthon

  • Do muscle mass, muscle density, strength, and physical function similarly influence risk of hospitalization in older adults?

    Peggy Mannen Cawthon;Kathleen M. Fox;Shravanthi R. Gandra;Matthew J. Delmonico

  • An Evidence-Based Comparison of Operational Criteria for the Presence of Sarcopenia

    Thuy Tien Dam;Katherine W. Peters;Maren Fragala;Peggy M. Cawthon

  • Cutpoints for Low Appendicular Lean Mass That Identify Older Adults With Clinically Significant Weakness

    Peggy M. Cawthon;Katherine W. Peters;Michelle D. Shardell;Robert R. McLean

  • High-Trauma Fractures and Low Bone Mineral Density in Older Women and Men

    Dawn C. Mackey;Li-Yung Lui;Peggy M. Cawthon;Douglas C. Bauer

  • Gender Differences in Osteoporosis and Fractures

    Peggy M. Cawthon

  • BMI and fracture risk in older men: The osteoporotic fractures in men study (MrOS)

    Carrie M Nielson;Lynn M Marshall;Annette L Adams;Erin S LeBlanc;Erin S LeBlanc

  • BMD and Risk of Hip and Nonvertebral Fractures in Older Men:A Prospective Study and Comparison With Older Women

    Steven R Cummings;Peggy M Cawthon;Kristine E Ensrud;Jane A Cauley

Frequent Co-Authors

Kristine E. Ensrud
Kristine E. Ensrud University of Minnesota
Jane A. Cauley
Jane A. Cauley University of Pittsburgh
Eric S. Orwoll
Eric S. Orwoll Oregon Health & Science University
Steven R. Cummings
Steven R. Cummings University of California, San Francisco
Elizabeth Barrett-Connor
Elizabeth Barrett-Connor University of California, San Diego
Nancy E. Lane
Nancy E. Lane University of California, Davis
Katie L. Stone
Katie L. Stone University of California, San Francisco
Anne B. Newman
Anne B. Newman University of Pittsburgh
Tamara B. Harris
Tamara B. Harris National Institutes of Health
Howard A Fink
Howard A Fink University of Minnesota

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

For those considering a future in Medicine, many related online degrees and flexible career pathways are now available. Nursing remains a high-demand field, with various options for advancing your credentials through online study. For example, many registered nurses are choosing to earn their bachelor's degree through rn to bsn without clinicals programs. These options are ideal for working professionals seeking less hands-on requirements and enhanced career prospects.

Aspiring nurse practitioners and leaders can also benefit from accelerated pathways. If you're interested in going further, investigate options like the shortest dnp programs online to quickly achieve a Doctor of Nursing Practice degree. Affordability is another critical factor, so be sure to explore cheapest dnp programs to make your education more accessible.

Looking to enter the field more quickly? Fast-track programs such as the 9 month lpn program can help you start your healthcare career in under a year. These online and hybrid programs offer flexible options to enhance your skills, resume, and career trajectory—whether you’re starting out or advancing in medicine.

Best Scientists Citing Peggy M. Cawthon

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles