IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI)

The ranking presented on this page offers a comprehensive evaluation of scientific conferences within the field of Engineering and Technology. Developed by Research.com, one of the world’s leading platforms dedicated to science research across all major disciplines, this ranking reflects a commitment to accuracy and reliability, having provided trusted data on scientific contributions since 2014.

Conference positions in this ranking are determined by a unique bibliometric score devised by the experts at Research.com. This score is meticulously computed based on two core metrics: the estimated h-index and the number of leading scientists who have contributed to the conference over the course of the last three years. This rigorous approach ensures that each conference is evaluated with a high standard of objectivity and academic credibility.

The ranking is underpinned by Impact Score values gathered on 2024-11-27. To compile this list, more than 2,262 conferences were subjected to a detailed and thorough examination, following a rigorous review of over 26,934 scientific documents published in the last three years. These publications were produced by 9,385 distinguished and widely respected scientists specializing in Engineering and Technology. This extensive analysis ensures that only those conferences demonstrating the highest impact and participation from preeminent researchers are featured.

Research.com continually refines its methodology to uphold the depth and quality of its conference assessments. Additional information regarding the methodology for calculating the ranking scores is available for your reference on our Methodology Page.

Papers citation over time

A key indicator for each conference is its effectiveness in reaching other researchers with the papers published at that venue.

The chart below presents the interquartile range (first quartile 25%, median 50% and third quartile 75%) of the number of citations of articles over time.

Top authors and change over time

The top authors publishing at International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (based on the number of publications) are:

• Paul M. Thompson (100 papers) published 10 papers at the last edition, 3 more than at the previous edition,
• Tianming Liu (57 papers) published 9 papers at the last edition, 2 more than at the previous edition,
• Arthur W. Toga (55 papers) absent at the last edition,
• Michael Unser (54 papers) published 3 papers at the last edition, 1 more than at the previous edition,
• Daniel Rueckert (52 papers) published 2 papers at the last edition the same number as at the previous edition.

The overall trend for top authors publishing at this conference is outlined below. The chart shows the number of publications at each edition of the conference for top authors.

Top affiliations and change over time

Only papers with recognized affiliations are considered

The top affiliations publishing at International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (based on the number of publications) are:

• University of California, Los Angeles (117 papers) published 3 papers at the last edition,
• French Institute for Research in Computer Science and Automation (109 papers) published 4 papers at the last edition, 5 less than at the previous edition,
• University of Oxford (84 papers) published 3 papers at the last edition, 3 less than at the previous edition,
• University of Pennsylvania (80 papers) absent at the last edition,
• French Institute of Health and Medical Research (77 papers) published 3 papers at the last edition, 2 more than at the previous edition.

The overall trend for top affiliations publishing at this conference is outlined below. The chart shows the number of publications at each edition of the conference for top affiliations.

Publication chance based on affiliation

The publication chance index shows the ratio of articles published by the best research institutions at the conference edition to all articles published within that conference. The best research institutions were selected based on the largest number of articles published during all editions of the conference.

The chart below presents the percentage ratio of articles from top institutions (based on their ranking of total papers).Top affiliations were grouped by their rank into the following tiers: top 1-10, top 11-20, top 21-50, and top 51+. Only articles with a recognized affiliation are considered.

During the most recent 2017 edition, 1.03% of publications had an unrecognized affiliation. Out of the publications with recognized affiliations, 12.20% were posted by at least one author from the top 10 institutions publishing at the conference. Another 13.59% included authors affiliated with research institutions from the top 11-20 affiliations. Institutions from the 21-50 range included 20.56% of all publications and 53.66% were from other institutions.

Returning Authors Index

A very common phenomenon observed among researchers publishing scientific articles is the intentional selection of conferences they have already attended in the past. In particular, it is worth analyzing the case when the authors participate in the same conference from year to year.

The Returning Authors Index presented below illustrates the ratio of authors who participated in both a given as well as the previous edition of the conference in relation to all participants in a given year.

Returning Institution Index

The graph below shows the Returning Institution Index, illustrating the ratio of institutions that participated in both a given and the previous edition of the conference in relation to all affiliations present in a given year.

The experience to innovation index

Our experience to innovation index was created to show a cross-section of the experience level of authors publishing at a conference. The index includes the authors publishing at the last edition of a conference, grouped by total number of publications throughout their academic career (P) and the total number of citations of these publications ever received (C).

The group intervals were selected empirically to best show the diversity of the authors' experiences, their labels were selected as a convenience, not as judgment. The authors were divided into the following groups:

• Novice - P < 5 or C < 25 (the number of publications less than 5 or the number of citations less than 25),
• Competent - P < 10 or C < 100 (the number of publications less than 10 or the number of citations less than 100),
• Experienced - P < 25 or C < 625 (the number of publications less than 25 or the number of citations less than 625),
• Master - P < 50 or C < 2500 (the number of publications less than 50 or the number of citations less than 2500),
• Star - P ≥ 50 and C ≥ 2500 (both the number of publications greater than 50 and the number of citations greater than 2500).

The chart below illustrates experience levels of first authors in cases of publications with multiple authors.

Practical Application and Career Path Towards Biomedical Imaging

One of the critical aspects missing in the article is the practical application and how someone can start a career in this field. The knowledge and skills in Artificial Intelligence, Computer Vision, or Pattern Recognition have extensive usage in many sectors, especially in medical imaging and research. Professionals with expertise in these areas, particularly Speech Language Pathologists, utilize algorithms and pattern recognition to enhance their work's efficiency and accuracy. If you're interested in pursuing a career in speech pathology or biomedical imaging, it's crucial to meet specific state’s licensure requirements. For instance, the Washington SLP license requirements provide guidelines that aspiring medical professionals should follow towards becoming proficient in this field. These state-specific requirements typically involve earning a graduate degree in communication sciences and disorders, completing supervised professional practice, and passing a national competency examination. Becoming proficient in using the leading-edge technologies and methodologies discussed in conferences like the International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging can be a significant booster to one's career in the medical field. The discovery of novel algorithms related to computer vision or pattern recognition not only opens up vistas for more research but also presents the potential to revolutionize diagnosis and treatment procedures. Consequently, this interplay between technology and the medical profession, including Speech Language Pathology, creates a vibrant field of research and practice. Learning these topics and implementing them can help aspiring medical professionals remain effective and relevant in their careers.