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
Neuroscience 60 3759 3437 332 302 254 22645

Rachael I. Scahill publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Rachael I. Scahill between 1999 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Rachael I. Scahill published across 28 years, from 1999 to 2026, averaging 9.4 papers a year. Output peaked at 28 publications in 2018. 9 of the 264 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20 25
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1999 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 28. Peak 28 publications in 2018. 1999: 1 publication 2000: 3 publications 2001: 6 publications 2002: 3 publications 2003: 2 publications 2004: 8 publications 2005: 4 publications 2006: 10 publications 2007: 6 publications 2008: 14 publications 2009: 9 publications 2010: 9 publications 2011: 5 publications 2012: 9 publications 2013: 9 publications 2014: 15 publications 2015: 9 publications 2016: 8 publications 2017: 16 publications 2018: 28 publications 2019: 11 publications 2020: 11 publications 2021: 21 publications 2022: 16 publications 2023: 6 publications 2024: 16 publications 2025: 8 publications 2026: 1 publication
1999 2026

264 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Rachael I. Scahill: publications per year, 1999 to 2026
Year Publications
1999 1
2000 3
2001 6
2002 3
2003 2
2004 8
2005 4
2006 10
2007 6
2008 14
2009 9
2010 9
2011 5
2012 9
2013 9
2014 15
2015 9
2016 8
2017 16
2018 28
2019 11
2020 11
2021 21
2022 16
2023 6
2024 16
2025 8
2026 1
Total 264
Download as CSV

Rachael I. Scahill 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 Rachael I. Scahill sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400 500
Bar chart with 86 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 38–47 to 887+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 539. Most scientists, 539, have 98–107 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 887 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 248–257 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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 scientist 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38–47 publications 887+

This scientist: 254 publications — 75th percentile

75% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Neuroscience scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,597 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
38–47 18
48–57 79
58–67 193
68–77 323
78–87 406
88–97 452
98–107 539
108–117 505
118–127 522
128–137 469
138–147 456
148–157 459
158–167 397
168–177 383
178–187 350
188–197 302
198–207 306
208–217 262
218–227 242
228–237 220
238–247 203
248–257 174 254
258–267 176
268–277 175
278–287 125
288–297 116
298–307 127
308–317 128
318–327 99
328–337 89
338–347 78
348–357 96
358–367 66
368–377 59
378–387 65
388–397 54
398–407 48
408–417 49
418–427 34
428–437 31
438–447 30
448–457 31
458–467 36
468–477 40
478–487 35
488–497 30
498–507 23
508–517 26
518–527 20
528–537 23
538–547 20
548–557 20
558–567 17
568–577 14
578–587 20
588–597 20
598–607 19
608–617 18
618–627 17
628–637 11
638–647 11
648–657 11
658–667 8
668–677 7
678–687 11
688–697 10
698–707 4
708–717 6
718–727 5
728–737 5
738–747 9
748–757 9
758–767 3
768–777 7
778–787 7
788–797 6
798–807 2
808–817 2
818–827 7
828–837 0
838–847 9
848–857 3
858–867 1
868–877 3
878–886 6
887+ 100
Download as CSV

Rachael I. Scahill 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 Rachael I. Scahill sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
100 200 300 400 500
Bar chart with 68 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 30–31 to 163+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 512. Most scientists, 512, have 46–47 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 163 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 60–61 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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
30–31 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 60 D-Index — 61st percentile

61% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Neuroscience scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 9,597 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
30–31 42
32–33 172
34–35 296
36–37 435
38–39 459
40–41 456
42–43 467
44–45 478
46–47 512
48–49 435
50–51 425
52–53 418
54–55 392
56–57 357
58–59 334
60–61 328 60
62–63 260
64–65 278
66–67 239
68–69 250
70–71 210
72–73 200
74–75 189
76–77 170
78–79 146
80–81 113
82–83 126
84–85 100
86–87 84
88–89 99
90–91 84
92–93 85
94–95 72
96–97 76
98–99 45
100–101 49
102–103 43
104–105 32
106–107 45
108–109 50
110–111 32
112–113 39
114–115 32
116–117 29
118–119 27
120–121 19
122–123 23
124–125 27
126–127 16
128–129 24
130–131 13
132–133 21
134–135 17
136–137 14
138–139 15
140–141 10
142–143 10
144–145 13
146–147 9
148–149 8
150–151 6
152–153 6
154–155 7
156–157 7
158–159 10
160–161 4
162 8
163+ 100
Download as CSV

Overview

Rachael I. Scahill is affiliated with University College London in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily focuses on neurodegenerative diseases, with a strong emphasis on Huntington's disease and related neurological disorders. The scientist's work encompasses multiple fields including Neuroscience, Medicine, and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology.

Their research spans several specialized subfields such as Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Neurology, Molecular Biology, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging, and Cognitive Neuroscience, reflecting a broad approach to neurological disease mechanisms and diagnostics.

Key topics addressed in their publications include Genetic Neurodegenerative Diseases, Neurological disorders and treatments, Mitochondrial Function and Pathology, Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications, Functional Brain Connectivity Studies, Botulinum Toxin and Related Neurological Disorders, and Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications.

Recent papers authored or co-authored by Rachael I. Scahill include:

  • Potential disease-modifying therapies for Huntington's disease: lessons learned and future opportunities, 2022, The Lancet Neurology
  • Biological and clinical characteristics of gene carriers far from predicted onset in the Huntington's disease Young Adult Study (HD-YAS): a cross-sectional analysis, 2020, The Lancet Neurology
  • Mutant huntingtin and neurofilament light have distinct longitudinal dynamics in Huntington's disease, 2020, Science Translational Medicine
  • The Dementias Platform UK (DPUK) Data Portal, 2020, European Journal of Epidemiology
  • Dynamics of Cortical Degeneration Over a Decade in Huntington's Disease, 2020, Biological Psychiatry

Frequent collaborators include Sarah J. Tabrizi, Eileanoir B. Johnson, Geraint Rees, Edward J. Wild, and Carlos Estevez-Fraga. These co-authorship patterns suggest active involvement in multidisciplinary and collaborative research projects within the field of neurodegeneration.

Rachael I. Scahill's work is often published in venues such as bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory), Brain Communications, Journal of Huntington's Disease, Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, and Frontiers in Neurology. The distribution of publications across these journals highlights a focus on both open access preprint dissemination and peer-reviewed clinical and neuroscience domains.

Best Publications

  • Automatic classification of MR scans in Alzheimer's disease

    Stefan Klöppel;Cynthia M. Stonnington;Carlton Chu;Bogdan Draganski

  • A longitudinal study of brain volume changes in normal aging using serial registered magnetic resonance imaging.

    Rachael I. Scahill;Chris Frost;Chris Frost;Rhian Jenkins;Jennifer L. Whitwell

  • Huntington disease: natural history, biomarkers and prospects for therapeutics

    Christopher A Ross;Elizabeth Hoppes Aylward;Edward J Wild;Douglas R Langbehn

  • Biological and clinical manifestations of Huntington's disease in the longitudinal TRACK-HD study: cross-sectional analysis of baseline data.

    Sarah J Tabrizi;Douglas R Langbehn;Blair R Leavitt;Raymund A C Roos

  • Mapping the evolution of regional atrophy in Alzheimer's disease: Unbiased analysis of fluid-registered serial MRI

    Rachael I. Scahill;Jonathan M. Schott;John M. Stevens;Martin N. Rossor

  • Predictors of phenotypic progression and disease onset in premanifest and early-stage Huntington's disease in the TRACK-HD study: analysis of 36-month observational data

    Sarah J Tabrizi;Rachael I Scahill;Gail N Owen;Alexandra Durr

  • Huntington disease

    Unknown

  • Patterns of temporal lobe atrophy in semantic dementia and Alzheimer's disease

    Dennis Chan;Nick C. Fox;Rachael I. Scahill;William R. Crum

  • Biological and clinical changes in premanifest and early stage Huntington's disease in the TRACK-HD study: the 12-month longitudinal analysis

    Sarah J Tabrizi;Rachael I Scahill;Alexandra Durr;Raymund A C Roos

  • Potential endpoints for clinical trials in premanifest and early Huntington's disease in the TRACK-HD study: analysis of 24 month observational data

    Sarah J Tabrizi;Ralph Reilmann;Raymond A C Roos;Alexandra Durr

  • Imaging of onset and progression of Alzheimer's disease with voxel-compression mapping of serial magnetic resonance images.

    Nick C Fox;William R Crum;Rachael I Scahill;John M Stevens;John M Stevens

  • Using serial registered brain magnetic resonance imaging to measure disease progression in Alzheimer disease - Power calculations and estimates of sample size to detect treatment effects

    Nick C. Fox;Simon Cousens;Rachael Scahill;Richard J. Harvey

  • Automatic differentiation of anatomical patterns in the human brain: validation with studies of degenerative dementias

    Catriona D. Good;Rachael I. Scahill;Nick C. Fox;John Ashburner

  • Correlation between rates of brain atrophy and cognitive decline in AD.

    N C Fox;R I Scahill;William Crum;M N Rossor

  • A meta-analysis of hippocampal atrophy rates in Alzheimer's disease.

    Josephine Barnes;Jonathan W. Bartlett;Laura A. van de Pol;Clement T. Loy

  • The clinical profile of right temporal lobe atrophy

    Dennis Chan;Valerie Anderson;Yolande Pijnenburg;Jennifer Whitwell

  • Neurofilament light protein in blood as a potential biomarker of neurodegeneration in Huntington's disease: a retrospective cohort analysis

    Lauren M Byrne;Filipe B. Rodrigues;Kaj Blennow;Kaj Blennow;Alexandra Durr

  • Potential disease-modifying therapies for Huntington's disease: lessons learned and future opportunities

    Unknown

  • Identification of genetic variants associated with Huntington's disease progression: a genome-wide association study

    Davina J Hensman Moss;Antonio F Pardiñas;Douglas Langbehn;Kitty Lo

  • An event-based model for disease progression and its application in familial Alzheimer's disease and Huntington's disease

    Hubert M. J. Fonteijn;Hubert M. J. Fonteijn;Marc Modat;Matthew J. Clarkson;Matthew J. Clarkson;Josephine Barnes

  • Ten simple rules for reporting voxel-based morphometry studies.

    Gerard R. Ridgway;Susie M.D. Henley;Jonathan D. Rohrer;Rachael I. Scahill

  • Rates of global and regional cerebral atrophy in AD and frontotemporal dementia

    D. Chan;N. C. Fox;R. Jenkins;R. I. Scahill

Frequent Co-Authors

Sarah J. Tabrizi
Sarah J. Tabrizi University College London
Nick C. Fox
Nick C. Fox University College London
Alexandra Durr
Alexandra Durr Sorbonne University
Blair R. Leavitt
Blair R. Leavitt University of British Columbia
Raymund A.C. Roos
Raymund A.C. Roos Leiden University Medical Center
Martin N. Rossor
Martin N. Rossor University College London
Geraint Rees
Geraint Rees University College London
Julie C. Stout
Julie C. Stout Monash University
Douglas R. Langbehn
Douglas R. Langbehn University of Iowa
Edward J. Wild
Edward J. Wild University College London

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

A background in neuroscience opens doors to diverse career options in research, mental health, counseling, and social work. For those looking to advance or pivot their careers, online degree programs offer flexible pathways tailored to various interests and timelines.

Many students interested in helping professions pursue accelerated online msw programs, which provide a streamlined path to a Master of Social Work and readiness for clinical or policy roles. Others may opt for a psychology degree online, enabling in-depth exploration of behavioral science and mental health from anywhere.

For those aiming to become licensed counselors, choosing from cacrep-accredited programs ensures the curriculum meets professional standards and supports licensure requirements. Budget-conscious learners may also prioritize the cheapest online masters in mental health counseling, which make advanced qualifications more accessible without compromising on quality.

These online routes not only complement neuroscience studies, but also empower graduates to pursue high-demand roles in counseling, social work, and psychological services.

Best Scientists Citing Rachael I. Scahill

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles