World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Stuart M. Phillips

Stuart M. Phillips

Award Badge
Medicine
Canada
2023

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
140
Citations
66323
World Ranking
1708
National Ranking
59

Stuart M. Phillips 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 Stuart M. Phillips sits on this spectrum.

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: 611 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 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 577 publications — 69th percentile

69% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Stuart M. Phillips 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 Stuart M. Phillips sits on this spectrum.

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: 400 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 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 140 D-Index — 92nd percentile

92% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2023 - Research.com Medicine in Canada Leader Award

Overview

Stuart M. Phillips is affiliated with McMaster University in Canada. Their research contributes extensively to the fields of Medicine and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, with a significant focus on subfields such as Physiology, Cell Biology, Molecular Biology, Orthopedics and Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation.

The scientist's main topics of work encompass several areas related to muscle biology and nutrition, including:

  • Muscle metabolism and nutrition
  • Muscle Physiology and Disorders
  • Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Sports Performance and Training
  • Exercise and Physiological Responses
  • Diet and metabolism studies
  • Cardiovascular and exercise physiology

Stuart M. Phillips has a recorded publication record in multiple venues. The most frequent publication venues include:

  • Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
  • Faculty Opinions - Post-Publication Peer Review of the Biomedical Literature
  • Applied Physiology Nutrition and Metabolism
  • Current Developments in Nutrition
  • International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism

The scientist has collaborated regularly with several coauthors, including:

  • James McKendry
  • Changhyun Lim
  • Chris McGlory
  • Everson Araújo Nunes
  • Giulia Coletta

Among notable recent papers authored or coauthored by Stuart M. Phillips are:

  • The Conceptual Definition of Sarcopenia: Delphi Consensus from the Global Leadership Initiative in Sarcopenia (GLIS), 2024, Age and Ageing
  • UEFA expert group statement on nutrition in elite football. Current evidence to inform practical recommendations and guide future research, 2020, British Journal of Sports Medicine
  • Systematic review and meta-analysis of protein intake to support muscle mass and function in healthy adults, 2022, Journal of Cachexia Sarcopenia and Muscle
  • An elusive consensus definition of sarcopenia impedes research and clinical treatment: A narrative review, 2023, Ageing Research Reviews
  • Mechanisms of mechanical overload-induced skeletal muscle hypertrophy: current understanding and future directions, 2023, Physiological Reviews

Best Publications

  • Evidence-Based Recommendations for Optimal Dietary Protein Intake in Older People: A Position Paper From the PROT-AGE Study Group

    Juergen Bauer;Gianni Biolo;Tommy Cederholm;Matteo Cesari

  • Similar metabolic adaptations during exercise after low volume sprint interval and traditional endurance training in humans

    Kirsten A. Burgomaster;Krista R. Howarth;Stuart M. Phillips;Mark Rakobowchuk

  • Mixed muscle protein synthesis and breakdown after resistance exercise in humans

    Stuart M Phillips;Kevin Tipton;Asle A Aarsland;Steven E Wolf

  • Ingested protein dose response of muscle and albumin protein synthesis after resistance exercise in young men

    Daniel R Moore;Meghann J Robinson;Jessica L Fry;Jason E Tang

  • Ingestion of whey hydrolysate, casein, or soy protein isolate: effects on mixed muscle protein synthesis at rest and following resistance exercise in young men

    Jason E. Tang;Daniel R. Moore;Gregory W. Kujbida;Mark A. Tarnopolsky

  • IOC Consensus Statement: Dietary Supplements and the High-Performance Athlete

    Ronald J. Maughan;Louise M. Burke;Jiri Dvorak;D. Enette Larson-Meyer

  • Postexercise net protein synthesis in human muscle from orally administered amino acids.

    Kevin D. Tipton;Arny A. Ferrando;Stuart M. Phillips;David Doyle

  • A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of the effect of protein supplementation on resistance training-induced gains in muscle mass and strength in healthy adults

    Robert W Morton;Kevin T Murphy;Sean R McKellar;Brad J Schoenfeld

  • Dietary protein for athletes: From requirements to optimum adaptation

    Stuart M. Phillips;Luc J.C. Van Loon

  • Protein Ingestion to Stimulate Myofibrillar Protein Synthesis Requires Greater Relative Protein Intakes in Healthy Older Versus Younger Men

    Daniel R. Moore;Tyler A. Churchward-Venne;Oliver Witard;Leigh Breen

  • Consumption of fat-free fluid milk after resistance exercise promotes greater lean mass accretion than does consumption of soy or carbohydrate in young, novice, male weightlifters

    Joseph W Hartman;Jason E Tang;Sarah B Wilkinson;Mark A Tarnopolsky

  • Resistance exercise load does not determine training-mediated hypertrophic gains in young men

    Cameron J. Mitchell;Tyler A. Churchward-Venne;Daniel W. D. West;Nicholas A. Burd

  • Differential effects of resistance and endurance exercise in the fed state on signalling molecule phosphorylation and protein synthesis in human muscle

    Sarah B. Wilkinson;Stuart M. Phillips;Philip J. Atherton;Rekha Patel

  • Low-Load High Volume Resistance Exercise Stimulates Muscle Protein Synthesis More Than High-Load Low Volume Resistance Exercise in Young Men

    Nicholas A. Burd;Daniel W. D. West;Aaron W. Staples;Philip J. Atherton

  • Consumption of fluid skim milk promotes greater muscle protein accretion after resistance exercise than does consumption of an isonitrogenous and isoenergetic soy-protein beverage

    Sarah B Wilkinson;Mark A Tarnopolsky;Maureen J MacDonald;Jay R MacDonald

  • Timing and distribution of protein ingestion during prolonged recovery from resistance exercise alters myofibrillar protein synthesis

    José L. Areta;Louise M. Burke;Megan L. Ross;Donny M. Camera

  • Skeletal muscle protein metabolism in the elderly: Interventions to counteract the 'anabolic resistance' of ageing

    Leigh Breen;Stuart M Phillips

  • Evaluation of protein requirements for trained strength athletes

    M. A. Tarnopolsky;S. A. Atkinson;J. D. MacDougall;A. Chesley

  • Resistance exercise enhances myofibrillar protein synthesis with graded intakes of whey protein in older men.

    Yifan Yang;Leigh Breen;Nicholas A. Burd;Amy J. Hector

  • Effects of leucine and its metabolite β‐hydroxy‐β‐methylbutyrate on human skeletal muscle protein metabolism

    D. J. Wilkinson;T. Hossain;D. S. Hill;B. E. Phillips

Frequent Co-Authors

Mark A. Tarnopolsky
Mark A. Tarnopolsky McMaster University
Louise M. Burke
Louise M. Burke Australian Catholic University
John A. Hawley
John A. Hawley Australian Catholic University
Michael J. Rennie
Michael J. Rennie University of Nottingham
Kenneth Smith
Kenneth Smith University of Nottingham
Lehana Thabane
Lehana Thabane McMaster University
Robert R. Wolfe
Robert R. Wolfe University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
Paul D. McNicholas
Paul D. McNicholas McMaster University
David Bishop
David Bishop Victoria University
Asker E. Jeukendrup
Asker E. Jeukendrup Loughborough University

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

If you’re considering studying Medicine in the USA, you may also be interested in alternative or complementary career pathways within healthcare. Online degrees offer flexible options for students wanting to balance studies with work or personal commitments. Options like the fastest psych np program can accelerate your route to becoming a Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner.

For those drawn to the business and organizational aspects of healthcare, an accredited health care administration online degree can open doors to supervisory and management roles. If affordability is a priority, you can explore cheap mha programs that lead to a Master of Healthcare Administration without breaking the bank.

For advanced practice nurses looking to achieve the highest clinical degree, consider enrolling in the cheapest dnp program for cost-effective doctoral education. With these diverse options, you can find a program that fits your career goals, schedule, and budget—all while preparing to make a meaningful impact in the healthcare field.

Best Scientists Citing Stuart M. Phillips

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles