World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Stephanie C. Joachim

Stephanie C. Joachim

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Neuroscience 41 7954 7347 666 633 180 4581

Stephanie C. Joachim publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Stephanie C. Joachim between 2002 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Stephanie C. Joachim published across 25 years, from 2002 to 2026, averaging 9.2 papers a year. Output peaked at 22 publications in 2019. 5 of the 230 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2002 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 22. Peak 22 publications in 2019. 2002: 1 publication 2003: 5 publications 2004: 3 publications 2005: 3 publications 2006: 2 publications 2007: 7 publications 2008: 9 publications 2009: 6 publications 2010: 7 publications 2011: 8 publications 2012: 5 publications 2013: 9 publications 2014: 9 publications 2015: 14 publications 2016: 13 publications 2017: 13 publications 2018: 16 publications 2019: 22 publications 2020: 22 publications 2021: 18 publications 2022: 13 publications 2023: 11 publications 2024: 9 publications 2025: 4 publications 2026: 1 publication
2002 2026

230 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Stephanie C. Joachim: publications per year, 2002 to 2026
Year Publications
2002 1
2003 5
2004 3
2005 3
2006 2
2007 7
2008 9
2009 6
2010 7
2011 8
2012 5
2013 9
2014 9
2015 14
2016 13
2017 13
2018 16
2019 22
2020 22
2021 18
2022 13
2023 11
2024 9
2025 4
2026 1
Total 230
Download as CSV

Stephanie C. Joachim 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 Stephanie C. Joachim 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, 178–187 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: 180 publications — 55th percentile

55% 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
178–187 350 180
188–197 302
198–207 306
208–217 262
218–227 242
228–237 220
238–247 203
248–257 174
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

Stephanie C. Joachim 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 Stephanie C. Joachim 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, 40–41 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: 41 D-Index — 19th percentile

19% 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 41
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
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

Stephanie C. Joachim is affiliated with Ruhr University Bochum in Germany, contributing extensively to the fields of Medicine and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology. Their research expertise spans several subfields, notably Ophthalmology, Molecular Biology, Neurology, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging, and Immunology.

Joachim's scholarly work broadly addresses topics in glaucoma and retinal disorders, retinal development and diseases, retinal disease treatments, neuroinflammation and neurodegeneration mechanisms, connexins and lens biology, S100 proteins and annexins, and cell adhesion molecules.

Frequent coauthors include:

  • H. Burkhard Dick
  • Sabrina Reinehr
  • Teresa Tsai
  • Ana M. Mueller-Buehl
  • Natalie Wagner

Common publication venues for Joachim's work are:

  • International Journal of Molecular Sciences
  • Die Ophthalmologie
  • Frontiers in Immunology
  • Frontiers in Neuroscience
  • Klinische Monatsblätter für Augenheilkunde

Selected recent papers include:

  • "Retina in a dish: Cell cultures, retinal explants and animal models for common diseases of the retina", 2020, Progress in Retinal and Eye Research
  • "Minocycline reduces inflammatory response and cell death in a S100B retina degeneration model", 2020, Journal of Neuroinflammation
  • "Age-dependent favorable visual recovery despite significant retinal atrophy in pediatric MOGAD: how much retina do you really need to see well?", 2021, Journal of Neuroinflammation
  • "Loss of the Extracellular Matrix Molecule Tenascin-C Leads to Absence of Reactive Gliosis and Promotes Anti-inflammatory Cytokine Expression in an Autoimmune Glaucoma Mouse Model", 2020, Frontiers in Immunology
  • "Microglia Activation in Retinal Ischemia Triggers Cytokine and Toll-Like Receptor Response", 2020, Journal of Molecular Neuroscience

The scope of Joachim's research demonstrates a focus on cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying retinal and neurological conditions. They investigate neuroinflammatory pathways and the role of specific proteins and extracellular matrix components in retinal degeneration and glaucoma.

Joachim has contributed to advancing the understanding of retinal diseases through experimental models, including cell cultures and animal studies, exploring inflammatory responses, visual recovery patterns, and molecular markers in disease contexts.

Best Publications

  • Inflammatory demyelination induces glia alterations and ganglion cell loss in the retina of an experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis model

    Lioba Horstmann;Heiko Schmid;André P Heinen;Florian C Kurschus

  • Serum Autoantibodies to α-Fodrin Are Present in Glaucoma Patients from Germany and the United States

    Franz H. Grus;Stephanie C. Joachim;Kai Bruns;Karl J. Lackner

  • Antibodies to alpha B-crystallin, vimentin, and heat shock protein 70 in aqueous humor of patients with normal tension glaucoma and IgG antibody patterns against retinal antigen in aqueous humor.

    Stephanie C Joachim;Kai Bruns;Karl J Lackner;Norbert Pfeiffer

  • Loss of inner retinal neurons after retinal ischemia in rats.

    Heiko Schmid;Marina Renner;H Burkhard Dick;Stephanie C Joachim

  • Changes in prostaglandin levels in patients undergoing femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery.

    Tim Schultz;Stephanie C. Joachim;Mathias Kuehn;H. Burkhard Dick

  • Complex autoantibody repertoires in patients with glaucoma.

    Franz H Grus;Stephanie C Joachim;Esther M Hoffmann;Norbert Pfeiffer

  • Retina in a dish: Cell cultures, retinal explants and animal models for common diseases of the retina.

    Sven Schnichels;François Paquet-Durand;Marina Löscher;Teresa Tsai

  • Sera of glaucoma patients show autoantibodies against myelin basic protein and complex autoantibody profiles against human optic nerve antigens.

    Stephanie C. Joachim;Jan Reichelt;Simone Berneiser;Norbert Pfeiffer

  • Autoantibodies in patients with glaucoma: a comparison of IgG serum antibodies against retinal, optic nerve, and optic nerve head antigens

    Stephanie C. Joachim;Norbert Pfeiffer;Franz H. Grus

  • Femtosecond laser–assisted cataract surgery in intumescent white cataracts

    Ina Conrad-Hengerer;Fritz H. Hengerer;Stephanie C. Joachim;Tim Schultz

  • Prostaglandin release during femtosecond laser-assisted cataract surgery: main inducer.

    Tim Schultz;Stephanie C Joachim;Mathias Stellbogen;H Burkhard Dick

  • Proteomics in ocular fluids.

    Franz H. Grus;Stephanie C. Joachim;Norbert Pfeiffer

  • Optic Nerve Degeneration after Retinal Ischemia/Reperfusion in a Rodent Model.

    Marina Renner;Gesa Stute;Mohammad Alzureiqi;Jacqueline Reinhard

  • Retinal ganglion cell loss is accompanied by antibody depositions and increased levels of microglia after immunization with retinal antigens.

    Stephanie C. Joachim;Oliver W. Gramlich;Panagiotis Laspas;Heiko Schmid

  • Autoimmunity and glaucoma.

    Franz H. Grus;Stephanie C. Joachim;Diana Wuenschig;Jochen Rieck

  • Correlation of Tear Film Osmolarity and 2 Different MMP-9 Tests With Common Dry Eye Tests in a Cohort of Non-Dry Eye Patients.

    Marc Schargus;Svetlana Ivanova;Vinodh Kakkassery;H. Burkhard Dick

  • IgG antibody patterns in aqueous humor of patients with primary open angle glaucoma and pseudoexfoliation glaucoma.

    Stephanie C Joachim;Diana Wuenschig;Norbert Pfeiffer;Franz H Grus

  • Retinal and Optic Nerve Damage is Associated with Early Glial Responses in an Experimental Autoimmune Glaucoma Model

    Rozina Noristani;Sandra Kuehn;Gesa Stute;Sabrina Reinehr

  • Autoreactive antibodies and loss of retinal ganglion cells in rats induced by immunization with ocular antigens.

    Panagiotis Laspas;Oliver W. Gramlich;Harald D. Müller;Clemens S. Cuny

  • Anti-inflammatory cytokine and angiogenic factors levels in vitreous samples of diabetic retinopathy patients.

    Teresa Tsai;Sandra Kuehn;Nikolaos Tsiampalis;Minh-Khoa Vu

  • Autoantibodies in Patients with Glaucoma: A Comparison of IgG Serum Antibodies against Retinal, Optic Nerve, and Optic Nerve Head Antigen

    S.C. Joachim;F.H. Grus;N. Pfeiffer

Frequent Co-Authors

Norbert Pfeiffer
Norbert Pfeiffer Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz
Andreas Faissner
Andreas Faissner Ruhr University Bochum
Ralf Gold
Ralf Gold Ruhr University Bochum
Karl J. Lackner
Karl J. Lackner Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz
Katrin Marcus
Katrin Marcus Ruhr University Bochum
Gregory P. Downey
Gregory P. Downey National Jewish Health
Uwe Wolfrum
Uwe Wolfrum Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz
Ari Waisman
Ari Waisman Johannes Gutenberg University of Mainz
Massimo Fantini
Massimo Fantini Precision Biologics
David C. S. Huang
David C. S. Huang Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research

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 career in neuroscience opens doors to several related educational options and professional pathways. Many students consider online programs for flexibility and affordability. For those concerned about expenses, it's wise to review psychology degree cost and compare institutions to find the best value.

Some neuroscience graduates choose to further their impact through social work or mental health support. If you’re interested in clinical or community services, exploring msw degree options can be valuable, especially programs that are more accessible and flexible.

Careers in advanced patient care or counseling may require a doctorate. For those wanting to work as psychology practitioners, comparing the best psyd programs can help you make an informed choice.

If your interests lean toward marriage and family therapy, look for mft accredited programs that offer streamlined paths to licensure and practical experience in therapeutic settings.

Best Scientists Citing Stephanie C. Joachim

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles