World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Neuroscience

D-Index
65
Citations
13568
World Ranking
3144
National Ranking
1466

Tamara J. Phillips 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 Tamara J. Phillips sits on this spectrum.

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 scientists 868–877 publications: 3 scientists 878–886 publications: 6 scientists 887+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 887+

This scientist: 209 publications — 65th percentile

65% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Tamara J. Phillips 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 Tamara J. Phillips sits on this spectrum.

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 D-Index 163+

This scientist: 65 D-Index — 68th percentile

68% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Tamara J. Phillips is affiliated with Oregon Health & Science University in the United States. Their research spans multiple disciplines including Neuroscience, Medicine, and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, with a focus on subfields such as Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, Physiology, Molecular Biology, Neurology, and Endocrine and Autonomic Systems.

Their work explores a variety of scientific topics, notably:

  • Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Adipose Tissue and Metabolism
  • Receptor Mechanisms and Signaling
  • Regulation of Appetite and Obesity
  • Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
  • Cannabis and Cannabinoid Research
  • Neuroinflammation and Neurodegeneration Mechanisms

Recent publications authored or coauthored by Phillips include:

  • "Sex Differences in the Brain Transcriptome Related to Alcohol Effects and Alcohol Use Disorder," 2021, published in Biological Psychiatry
  • "Phenotypic and gene expression features associated with variation in chronic ethanol consumption in heterogeneous stock collaborative cross mice," 2020, published in Genomics
  • "Non-genetic factors that influence methamphetamine intake in a genetic model of differential methamphetamine consumption," 2020, published in Psychopharmacology
  • "Confirmation of a Causal Taar1 Allelic Variant in Addiction-Relevant Methamphetamine Behaviors," 2021, published in Frontiers in Psychiatry
  • "Robust aversive effects of trace amine-associated receptor 1 activation in mice," 2023, published in Neuropsychopharmacology

Frequently collaborating coauthors include Cheryl Reed, Robert Hitzemann, Angela R. Ozburn, Denesa Lockwood, and Priscila Darakjian.

Their contributions appear predominantly in peer-reviewed journals such as Frontiers in Psychiatry, Biological Psychiatry, Neuropsychopharmacology, Genes Brain & Behavior, and Molecular Pharmacology, with multiple publications in each.

Best Publications

  • Abnormal adaptations to stress and impaired cardiovascular function in mice lacking corticotropin-releasing hormone receptor-2

    Sarah C Coste;Robert A Kesterson;Kurt A Heldwein;Susan L Stevens

  • Mice lacking dopamine D4 receptors are supersensitive to ethanol, cocaine, and methamphetamine

    Marcelo Rubinstein;Tamara J. Phillips;Tamara J. Phillips;James R. Bunzow;Tomás L. Falzone

  • Different data from different labs: lessons from studies of gene-environment interaction.

    Douglas Wahlsten;Pamela Metten;Tamara J. Phillips;Stephen L. Boehm

  • Locomotor Activity in D2 Dopamine Receptor-Deficient Mice Is Determined by Gene Dosage, Genetic Background, and Developmental Adaptations

    Michele A. Kelly;Marcelo Rubinstein;Tamara J. Phillips;Christina N. Lessov

  • Elevated alcohol consumption in null mutant mice lacking 5-HT1B serotonin receptors

    John C. Crabbe;Tamara J. Phillips;Daniel J. Feller;René Hen

  • Do initial responses to drugs predict future use or abuse

    Harriet de Wit;Tamara J. Phillips

  • Complications associated with genetic background effects in research using knockout mice

    Tamara J. Phillips;Rene Hen;John C. Crabbe

  • A Line of Mice Selected for High Blood Ethanol Concentrations Shows Drinking in the Dark to Intoxication

    John C. Crabbe;Pamela Metten;Justin S. Rhodes;Chia Hua Yu

  • The complexity of alcohol drinking: Studies in rodent genetic models

    John C. Crabbe;John C. Crabbe;Tamara J. Phillips;Tamara J. Phillips;John K. Belknap;John K. Belknap

  • Behavioral Studies of Genetic Differences in Alcohol Action

    Tamara J. Phillips;John C. CrabbeJr.

  • Localization of Genes Mediating Acute and Sensitized Locomotor Responses to Cocaine in BXD/Ty Recombinant Inbred Mice

    Tamara J. Phillips;Tamara J. Phillips;Mary G. Huson;Carrie S. McKinnon

  • Sex differences in the effect of ethanol injection and consumption on brain allopregnanolone levels in C57BL/6 mice

    D.A Finn;R.S Sinnott;M.M Ford;S.L Long

  • Genetic analyses of the biphasic nature of the alcohol dose-response curve.

    Bruce C. Dudek;Tamara J. Phillips;Martin E. Hahn

  • Selected mouse lines, alcohol and behavior.

    T. J. Phillips;D. J. Feller;D. J. Feller;J. C. Crabbe;J. C. Crabbe

  • Neurosteroid Modulators of GABAA Receptors Differentially Modulate Ethanol Intake Patterns in Male C57BL/6J Mice

    Matthew M. Ford;Jeffrey D. Nickel;Tamara J. Phillips;Deborah A. Finn

  • Voluntary ethanol drinking in C57Bl/6J and DBA/2J mice before and after sensitization to the locomotor stimulant effects of ethanol

    Christina N. Lessov;Abraham A. Palmer;Edwin A. Quick;Tamara J. Phillips

  • Response to selection for ethanol-induced locomotor activation: genetic analyses and selection response characterization

    Tamara J. Phillips;Sue Burkhart-Kasch;Erik S. Terdal;John C. Crabbe

  • The Edinger-Westphal–Lateral Septum Urocortin Pathway and Its Relationship to Alcohol Consumption

    Ryan K. Bachtell;Adam Z. Weitemier;Agustin Galvan-Rosas;Natalia O. Tsivkovskaia

  • Duration of sensitization to the locomotor stimulant effects of ethanol in mice.

    Christina N. Lessov;Tamara J. Phillips

  • Harnessing the mouse to unravel the genetics of human disease.

    T. J. Phillips;J. K. Belknap;J. K. Belknap;R. J. Hitzemann;R. J. Hitzemann;K. J. Buck

  • Gene expression differences in mice divergently selected for methamphetamine sensitivity.

    Abraham A. Palmer;Miguel Verbitsky;Rathi Suresh;Helen M. Kamens

Frequent Co-Authors

John C. Crabbe
John C. Crabbe Oregon Health & Science University
John K. Belknap
John K. Belknap Oregon Health & Science University
Robert Hitzemann
Robert Hitzemann Oregon Health & Science University
Deborah A. Finn
Deborah A. Finn Oregon Health & Science University
Abraham A. Palmer
Abraham A. Palmer University of California, San Diego
Kim A. Neve
Kim A. Neve Oregon Health & Science University
Shannon K. McWeeney
Shannon K. McWeeney Oregon Health & Science University
Robert W. Williams
Robert W. Williams University of Tennessee Health Science Center
Suzanne H. Mitchell
Suzanne H. Mitchell Oregon Health & Science University
Andrey E. Ryabinin
Andrey E. Ryabinin Oregon Health & Science 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

As interest grows in studying neuroscience, many students are exploring online degree options and diverse career pathways in related fields. Flexible programs, such as online psyd degrees, offer specialized training for those interested in clinical psychology and neuropsychology. These programs often allow students to balance education with work or family commitments.

For those focused on therapy and counseling, lmft online programs (Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist) represent a fast-track route to professional licensure and practice. These degrees provide a pathway for neuroscience graduates passionate about mental and behavioral health.

Students seeking rapid entry into the workforce may consider accelerated degrees online, which condense coursework and help fast-track career advancement. Some of these accelerated programs also align with the highest paying degrees in the world, making them attractive for those prioritizing financial stability.

Whether aiming for clinical practice, research, or lucrative industries, understanding these related online degrees helps guide your next steps after studying neuroscience in the USA.

Best Scientists Citing Tamara J. Phillips

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles