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 92 11258 10582 1068 1020 866 32992

Sheila Payne publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Sheila Payne between 1970 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Sheila Payne published across 56 years, from 1970 to 2025, averaging 17 papers a year. Output peaked at 58 publications in 2009. 30 of the 953 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30 40 50
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1970 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 58. Peak 58 publications in 2009. 1970: 2 publications 1971: 0 publications 1972: 0 publications 1973: 0 publications 1974: 0 publications 1975: 0 publications 1976: 0 publications 1977: 0 publications 1978: 0 publications 1979: 0 publications 1980: 0 publications 1981: 0 publications 1982: 0 publications 1983: 0 publications 1984: 0 publications 1985: 0 publications 1986: 0 publications 1987: 0 publications 1988: 1 publication 1989: 1 publication 1990: 1 publication 1991: 5 publications 1992: 5 publications 1993: 4 publications 1994: 10 publications 1995: 8 publications 1996: 10 publications 1997: 15 publications 1998: 24 publications 1999: 25 publications 2000: 24 publications 2001: 22 publications 2002: 23 publications 2003: 25 publications 2004: 46 publications 2005: 40 publications 2006: 47 publications 2007: 44 publications 2008: 51 publications 2009: 58 publications 2010: 43 publications 2011: 33 publications 2012: 34 publications 2013: 41 publications 2014: 49 publications 2015: 19 publications 2016: 36 publications 2017: 30 publications 2018: 30 publications 2019: 29 publications 2020: 38 publications 2021: 21 publications 2022: 19 publications 2023: 10 publications 2024: 16 publications 2025: 14 publications
1970 2025

953 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Sheila Payne: publications per year, 1970 to 2025
Year Publications
1970 2
1971 0
1972 0
1973 0
1974 0
1975 0
1976 0
1977 0
1978 0
1979 0
1980 0
1981 0
1982 0
1983 0
1984 0
1985 0
1986 0
1987 0
1988 1
1989 1
1990 1
1991 5
1992 5
1993 4
1994 10
1995 8
1996 10
1997 15
1998 24
1999 25
2000 24
2001 22
2002 23
2003 25
2004 46
2005 40
2006 47
2007 44
2008 51
2009 58
2010 43
2011 33
2012 34
2013 41
2014 49
2015 19
2016 36
2017 30
2018 30
2019 29
2020 38
2021 21
2022 19
2023 10
2024 16
2025 14
Total 953
Download as CSV

Sheila Payne 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 Sheila Payne 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, 861–880 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: 866 publications — 90th percentile

90% 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
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
861–880 155 866
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

Sheila Payne 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 Sheila Payne 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, 92–93 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: 92 D-Index — 45th percentile

45% 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
90–91 922
92–93 839 92
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

What is she best known for?

The fields of study she is best known for:

  • Law
  • Nursing
  • Health care

Her main research concerns Palliative care, Nursing, MEDLINE, Family medicine and End-of-life care. The Palliative care study combines topics in areas such as Psychological intervention, Context, Gerontology and Intensive care medicine. Her biological study spans a wide range of topics, including Health care and White paper.

Sheila Payne has included themes like Cancer, Psychiatry, Quality of life, Disease and Qualitative research in her MEDLINE study. Sheila Payne combines subjects such as Service delivery framework, Critical care nursing, Intensive care and Public health with her study of Family medicine. Her research integrates issues of Narrative, Cultural diversity and Citation in her study of End-of-life care.

Her most cited work include:

  • Observational study of effect of patient centredness and positive approach on outcomes of general practice consultations (696 citations)
  • Preferences of patients for patient centred approach to consultation in primary care: observational study (594 citations)
  • Appraising the Evidence: Reviewing Disparate Data Systematically (569 citations)

What are the main themes of her work throughout her whole career to date?

Her primary scientific interests are in Nursing, Palliative care, Family medicine, End-of-life care and Qualitative research. Her study in Nursing is interdisciplinary in nature, drawing from both Thematic analysis, Older people and Health care. She combines subjects such as Psychological intervention, Context, MEDLINE, Long-term care and Intensive care medicine with her study of Palliative care.

Her biological study spans a wide range of topics, including Alternative medicine, Cancer, Nursing homes and Cross-sectional study. Her End-of-life care study frequently intersects with other fields, such as Gerontology.

She most often published in these fields:

  • Nursing (47.21%)
  • Palliative care (44.96%)
  • Family medicine (30.49%)

What were the highlights of her more recent work (between 2016-2021)?

  • Palliative care (44.96%)
  • Nursing (47.21%)
  • Family medicine (30.49%)

In recent papers she was focusing on the following fields of study:

Sheila Payne mainly investigates Palliative care, Nursing, Family medicine, End-of-life care and Long-term care. Her work deals with themes such as Psychological intervention, Context, Nursing homes, Health care and Randomized controlled trial, which intersect with Palliative care. In her work, Observational study is strongly intertwined with MEDLINE, which is a subfield of Psychological intervention.

Her Nursing research is multidisciplinary, incorporating perspectives in PsycINFO, Qualitative research, Narrative and Health professionals. Her Family medicine study which covers Advance care planning that intersects with Clinical trial. Her Long-term care research includes elements of Cross-sectional study, Demography and Gerontology.

Between 2016 and 2021, her most popular works were:

  • Definition and recommendations for advance care planning : an international consensus supported by the European Association for Palliative Care (311 citations)
  • Guidance on Conducting and REporting DElphi Studies (CREDES) in palliative care: Recommendations based on a methodological systematic review. (165 citations)
  • The online use of Violence and Journey metaphors by patients with cancer, as compared with health professionals : a mixed methods study (88 citations)

In her most recent research, the most cited papers focused on:

  • Law
  • Health care
  • Nursing

The scientist’s investigation covers issues in Palliative care, Nursing, Family medicine, End-of-life care and Qualitative research. Particularly relevant to Advance care planning is her body of work in Palliative care. Her research in Nursing is mostly focused on Quality of life.

Her Family medicine study incorporates themes from Context, Assisted suicide, Cancer, Cross-sectional study and CINAHL. Her End-of-life care study combines topics in areas such as Coping, Terminally ill, Narrative inquiry and Imprisonment. Her work carried out in the field of Qualitative research brings together such families of science as Nursing research, Integrated care, Observational study and Health professionals.

Best Publications

  • Definition and recommendations for advance care planning : an international consensus supported by the European Association for Palliative Care

    Judith A C Rietjens;Rebecca L Sudore;Rebecca L Sudore;Michael Connolly;Johannes J van Delden

  • Appraising the Evidence: Reviewing Disparate Data Systematically

    Sheila Hawker;Sheila Payne;Christine Kerr;Michael Hardey

  • Observational study of effect of patient centredness and positive approach on outcomes of general practice consultations

    Paul Little;Hazel Everitt;Ian Williamson;Greg Warner

  • Guidance on Conducting and REporting DElphi Studies (CREDES) in palliative care: Recommendations based on a methodological systematic review.

    Saskia Jünger;Sheila A Payne;Jenny Brine;Lukas Radbruch

  • Preferences of patients for patient centred approach to consultation in primary care: observational study.

    Paul Little;Hazel Everitt;Ian Williamson;Greg Warner

  • Systematic review of the problems and issues of accessing specialist palliative care by patients, carers and health and social care professionals.

    N. Ahmed;J. C. Bestall;Sam H. Ahmedzai;Sheila Payne

  • Are There Differences in the Prevalence of Palliative Care-Related Problems in People Living With Advanced Cancer and Eight Non-Cancer Conditions? A Systematic Review

    Katrien Moens;Irene J. Higginson;Richard Harding;Sarah Brearley

  • The impact of stroke on informal carers : a literature review.

    Joseph T.S Low;Sheila Payne;Paul Roderick

  • Advanced cancer patients' prognostic information preferences: a review.

    S Innes;S Payne

  • What is the evidence for the use of mindfulness-based interventions in cancer care? A review

    Christina Shennan;Sheila Payne;Deborah Fenlon

  • Identifying the concerns of informal carers in palliative care.

    Sheila Payne;P. Smith;S. Dean

  • The online use of Violence and Journey metaphors by patients with cancer, as compared with health professionals : a mixed methods study

    Elena Semino;Zsófia Demjén;Jane Demmen;Veronika Koller

  • Development of a Disease Specific Quality of Life (QoL) Questionnaire Module to Supplement the EORTC Core Cancer QoL Questionnaire, the QLQ-C30 in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer

    D. Fitzsimmons;C.D. Johnson;S. George;S. Payne

  • Perceptions of a 'good' death: a comparative study of the views of hospice staff and patients:

    Sheila Payne;A. Langley-Evans;R. Hillier

  • White paper on standards and norms for hospice and palliative care in Europe : part 1.

    L. Radbruch;Sheila Payne

  • Supporting lay carers in end of life care: Current gaps and future priorities

    Gunn Grande;Kelli I Stajduhar;S. Aoun;Caroline Toye

  • A study of quality of life in cancer patients receiving palliative chemotherapy.

    Sheila Payne

  • What research evidence is there for the use of art therapy in the management of symptoms in adults with cancer? A systematic review.

    Michele J. M. Wood;Alexander Molassiotis;Sheila Payne

  • Core competencies in palliative care: an EAPC White Paper on palliative care education – part 1

    C Gamondi;P Larkin;S Payne

  • White Paper on standards and norms for hospice and palliative care in Europe : part 2.

    L. Radbruch;Sheila Payne

Frequent Co-Authors

Luc Deliens
Luc Deliens Vrije Universiteit Brussel
Julia Addington-Hall
Julia Addington-Hall University of Southampton
Lukas Radbruch
Lukas Radbruch University Hospital Bonn
Neil Small
Neil Small University of Bradford
Carol Thomas
Carol Thomas Lancaster University
Christine Milligan
Christine Milligan Lancaster University
Peter Hudson
Peter Hudson Ascension Health
Paul Rayson
Paul Rayson Lancaster University
Elena Semino
Elena Semino Lancaster University
Peter Smith
Peter Smith University of Aberdeen

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

Medicine in the USA offers a variety of alternative online degrees and career paths if you’re interested in healthcare but not committed to traditional medical school routes. For example, non-nurses seeking to quickly enter advanced nursing roles may consider direct entry msn programs for non nurses online. These programs are designed for individuals with a bachelor’s degree in another field, offering a streamlined path to a nursing master’s degree.

If you are looking for a more accessible entry point, consider researching the easiest bsn program to get into. These schools can make it simpler to launch a nursing career, even if your academic background isn’t perfect. Additionally, healthcare administration offers promising opportunities through medical billing and coding schools online with financial aid, allowing you to work in healthcare without direct patient contact.

It’s also worth considering schools that have flexible admissions criteria. Some of the do you have to take the teas test to get into nursing school options don’t require standardized entrance exams, making them more accessible for a wide range of applicants.

Best Scientists Citing Sheila Payne

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles