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
Psychology 36 9412 8796 4983 4539 130 7129

Philip Schatz publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Philip Schatz between 1996 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Philip Schatz published across 30 years, from 1996 to 2025, averaging 5.9 papers a year. Output peaked at 15 publications in 2020. 14 of the 178 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1996 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 15. Peak 15 publications in 2020. 1996: 2 publications 1997: 3 publications 1998: 3 publications 1999: 9 publications 2000: 6 publications 2001: 4 publications 2002: 4 publications 2003: 3 publications 2004: 0 publications 2005: 5 publications 2006: 3 publications 2007: 3 publications 2008: 0 publications 2009: 4 publications 2010: 5 publications 2011: 10 publications 2012: 5 publications 2013: 5 publications 2014: 8 publications 2015: 7 publications 2016: 7 publications 2017: 12 publications 2018: 7 publications 2019: 11 publications 2020: 15 publications 2021: 15 publications 2022: 2 publications 2023: 6 publications 2024: 8 publications 2025: 6 publications
1996 2025

178 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Philip Schatz: publications per year, 1996 to 2025
Year Publications
1996 2
1997 3
1998 3
1999 9
2000 6
2001 4
2002 4
2003 3
2004 0
2005 5
2006 3
2007 3
2008 0
2009 4
2010 5
2011 10
2012 5
2013 5
2014 8
2015 7
2016 7
2017 12
2018 7
2019 11
2020 15
2021 15
2022 2
2023 6
2024 8
2025 6
Total 178
Download as CSV

Philip Schatz 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 Philip Schatz sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 69 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 31–40 to 705+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 736. Most scientists, 736, have 101–110 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 705 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 121–130 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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
31–40 publications 705+

This scientist: 130 publications — 38th percentile

38% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
31–40 6
41–50 52
51–60 138
61–70 299
71–80 461
81–90 605
91–100 713
101–110 736
111–120 686
121–130 670 130
131–140 644
141–150 597
151–160 576
161–170 477
171–180 450
181–190 397
191–200 343
201–210 328
211–220 313
221–230 283
231–240 226
241–250 196
251–260 201
261–270 171
271–280 151
281–290 139
291–300 113
301–310 102
311–320 100
321–330 76
331–340 92
341–350 85
351–360 69
361–370 71
371–380 63
381–390 58
391–400 57
401–410 43
411–420 33
421–430 50
431–440 41
441–450 32
451–460 27
461–470 28
471–480 25
481–490 28
491–500 20
501–510 23
511–520 26
521–530 17
531–540 21
541–550 14
551–560 16
561–570 10
571–580 22
581–590 9
591–600 14
601–610 9
611–620 11
621–630 4
631–640 7
641–650 5
651–660 10
661–670 8
671–680 8
681–690 4
691–700 3
701–704 4
705+ 100
Download as CSV

Philip Schatz 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 Philip Schatz sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600
Bar chart with 58 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 144+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 702. Most scientists, 702, have 32–33 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 144 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 36–37 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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
30–31 D-Index 144+

This scientist: 36 D-Index — 19th percentile

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

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Psychology scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 11,416 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 398
32–33 702
34–35 671
36–37 659 36
38–39 641
40–41 671
42–43 617
44–45 558
46–47 495
48–49 487
50–51 445
52–53 390
54–55 408
56–57 345
58–59 325
60–61 321
62–63 248
64–65 290
66–67 218
68–69 219
70–71 215
72–73 183
74–75 169
76–77 132
78–79 137
80–81 120
82–83 112
84–85 86
86–87 101
88–89 83
90–91 77
92–93 70
94–95 78
96–97 58
98–99 53
100–101 57
102–103 48
104–105 53
106–107 46
108–109 24
110–111 35
112–113 27
114–115 32
116–117 31
118–119 22
120–121 16
122–123 24
124–125 18
126–127 11
128–129 19
130–131 10
132–133 16
134–135 10
136–137 12
138–139 8
140–141 5
142–143 12
144+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

Philip Schatz is affiliated with Saint Joseph's University in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on the field of Medicine, with a significant number of publications in epidemiology, emergency medicine, neurology, psychiatry and mental health, and public health, environmental and occupational health.

The main topics of their work include:

  • Traumatic Brain Injury Research
  • Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
  • Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Resilience and Mental Health
  • Injury Epidemiology and Prevention
  • Sports injuries and prevention
  • Cerebral Palsy and Movement Disorders

Philip Schatz has contributed research articles to various publication venues, with multiple papers appearing in the following journals:

  • Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology
  • Developmental Neuropsychology
  • Applied Neuropsychology Adult
  • Journal of Athletic Training
  • The Physician and Sportsmedicine

Some notable recent papers include:

  • "Using change scores on the vestibular ocular motor screening (VOMS) tool to identify concussion in adolescents" (2021), published in Applied Neuropsychology Child
  • "A Population-Based Study of Pre-Existing Health Conditions in Traumatic Brain Injury" (2021), published in Neurotrauma Reports
  • "Youth Soccer Parents' Perceptions of Long-Term Effects of Concussion" (2020), published in Developmental Neuropsychology
  • "Understanding racial differences in computerized neurocognitive test performance and symptom-reporting to deliver culturally competent patient-centered care for sport-related concussion" (2021), published in Applied Neuropsychology Adult
  • "Brief iPad-Based Assessment of Cognitive Functioning with ImPACT® Quick Test: Prevalence of Low Scores Using Multivariate Base Rates" (2020), published in Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology

Frequent co-authors in their research include:

  • R.J. Elbin
  • Melissa N. Womble
  • Anthony P. Kontos
  • Rosemarie Scolaro Moser
  • Tracey Covassin

Best Publications

  • Sensitivity and specificity of the ImPACT Test Battery for concussion in athletes

    Philip Schatz;Jamie E. Pardini;Mark R. Lovell;Michael W. Collins

  • The Relationship between Neurocognitive Function and Noncontact Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries

    Charles Buz Swanik;Tracey Covassin;David J. Stearne;Philip Schatz

  • What is the difference in concussion management in children as compared with adults? A systematic review

    Gavin A. Davis;Vicki Anderson;Franz E Babl;Gerard A. Gioia

  • Sex differences in neuropsychological function and post-concussion symptoms of concussed collegiate athletes.

    Tracey Covassin;Philip Schatz;C. Buz Swanik

  • Sex differences in baseline neuropsychological function and concussion symptoms of collegiate athletes

    Tracey Covassin;C. B. Swanik;M. Sachs;Z. Kendrick

  • Long-Term Test-Retest Reliability of Baseline Cognitive Assessments Using ImPACT

    Philip Schatz

  • Efficacy of immediate and delayed cognitive and physical rest for treatment of sports-related concussion.

    Rosemarie Scolaro Moser;Colette Glatts;Philip Schatz;Philip Schatz

  • One-Year Test-Retest Reliability of the Online Version of ImPACT in High School Athletes

    R. J. Elbin;Philip Schatz;Tracey Covassin

  • Applications of computer-based neuropsychological assessment.

    Philip Schatz;Jeffrey Browndyke

  • Neuropsychological evaluation in the diagnosis and management of sports-related concussion

    Rosemarie Scolaro Moser;Grant L. Iverson;Ruben J. Echemendia;Mark R. Lovell

  • Individual and Combined Effects of LD and ADHD on Computerized Neurocognitive Concussion Test Performance: Evidence for Separate Norms

    R J Elbin;Anthony P Kontos;Nate Kegel;Eric Johnson

  • Removal From Play After Concussion and Recovery Time

    R.J. Elbin;Alicia Sufrinko;Philip Schatz;Jon French

  • Enduring effects of concussion in youth athletes.

    Rosemarie Scolaro Moser;Philip Schatz

  • Sensitivity and Specificity of the Online Version of ImPACT in High School and Collegiate Athletes

    Philip Schatz;Natalie Sandel

  • Group Versus Individual Administration Affects Baseline Neurocognitive Test Performance

    Rosemarie Scolaro Moser;Philip Schatz;Philip Schatz;Katherine Neidzwski;Summer D. Ott

  • Early indicators of enduring symptoms in high school athletes with multiple previous concussions.

    Philip Schatz;Rosemarie Scolaro Moser;Tracey Covassin;Robin Karpf

  • One-Month Test–Retest Reliability of the ImPACT Test Battery

    Philip Schatz;Charles S. Ferris

  • Current Issues in the Identification, Assessment, and Management of Concussions in Sports-Related Injuries

    Catherine K. McKeever;Philip Schatz

  • Computer-based assessment of sports-related concussion.

    Philip Schatz;Eric A. Zillmer

  • Epidemiological shifts in elderly traumatic brain injury: 18-year trends in Pennsylvania

    Deepa M. Ramanathan;Nathan McWilliams;Philip Schatz;Frank G. Hillary

  • "Sandbagging" baseline test performance on ImPACT, without detection, is more difficult than it appears.

    Philip Schatz;Colette Glatts

Frequent Co-Authors

Anthony P. Kontos
Anthony P. Kontos University of Pittsburgh
Tracey Covassin
Tracey Covassin Michigan State University
Frank G. Hillary
Frank G. Hillary Pennsylvania State University
Grant L. Iverson
Grant L. Iverson Harvard University
Mark A. Lovell
Mark A. Lovell University of Kentucky
Ross Zafonte
Ross Zafonte Harvard Medical School
John DeLuca
John DeLuca Kessler Foundation
Jeffrey T. Barth
Jeffrey T. Barth University of Virginia
Joseph J. Ryan
Joseph J. Ryan University of Central Missouri
Vicki Anderson
Vicki Anderson Murdoch Children's Research Institute

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 online psychology degrees in the USA opens up flexible learning options for a diverse group of students. Many universities now offer online and hybrid programs, making it easier to balance education with work and personal commitments. A key consideration when choosing an online program is affordability, which can vary widely between states and institutions.

Prospective students can make informed decisions by researching tuition rates and available financial aid. For example, if you’re based in Missouri, you may want to review the most affordable psychology degree programs in Missouri. Those considering options in North Carolina might explore the cheapest psychology programs in North Carolina. In New York City, there are several affordable psychology programs in New York City. Similarly, residents of New Jersey have access to some of the cheapest psychology programs in New Jersey.

Whether your goal is counseling, research, or organizational psychology, an online psychology degree can serve as a strong foundation. Careful comparison of costs, curriculum, and career pathways will help you choose the program that best fits your goals.

Best Scientists Citing Philip Schatz

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles