World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
114
Citations
59401
World Ranking
4657
National Ranking
2530

Arthur J. Matas 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 Arthur J. Matas 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: 849 publications — 89th percentile

89% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Arthur J. Matas 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 Arthur J. Matas 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: 114 D-Index — 77th percentile

77% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Arthur J. Matas is affiliated with the University of Minnesota in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on the field of Medicine, with a significant concentration in subfields such as Transplantation, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Surgery, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, and Infectious Diseases.

The scientist's main topics of work include:

  • Renal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
  • Organ Donation and Transplantation
  • Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
  • Renal and Vascular Pathologies
  • Pharmacological Effects and Toxicity Studies
  • Dialysis and Renal Disease Management
  • Transplantation: Methods and Outcomes

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Arthur J. Matas include:

  • Ajay K. Israni (23 collaborations)
  • Erika S. Helgeson (17 collaborations)
  • Pamala A. Jacobson (16 collaborations)
  • Roslyn B. Mannon (15 collaborations)
  • William S. Oetting (15 collaborations)

They have published extensively in a number of venues, with the most common being:

  • Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (12 publications)
  • Clinical Transplantation (11 publications)
  • American Journal of Transplantation (10 publications)
  • Transplantation (8 publications)
  • JAMA Surgery (7 publications)

Notable recent publications include:

  • Finding the Dose for Hydroxychloroquine Prophylaxis for COVID-19: The Desperate Search for Effectiveness, 2020, Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
  • Impact of remdesivir according to the pre-admission symptom duration in patients with COVID-19, 2021, Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy
  • Challenges in the management of the kidney allograft: from decline to failure: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference, 2023, Kidney International
  • Belatacept for Simultaneous Calcineurin Inhibitor and Chronic Corticosteroid Immunosuppression Avoidance, 2021, Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
  • Race-free estimated glomerular filtration rate equation in kidney transplant recipients: development and validation study, 2023, BMJ

Best Publications

  • K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: Evaluation, classification, and stratification

    Andrew S. Levey;Josef Coresh;Kline Bolton;Bruce Culleton

  • Understanding the causes of kidney transplant failure: the dominant role of antibody-mediated rejection and nonadherence.

    J. Sellarés;D. G. de Freitas;M. Mengel;J. Reeve

  • Long-Term Consequences of Kidney Donation

    Hassan N. Ibrahim;Robert Foley;LiPing Tan;Tyson Rogers

  • 20 years or more of follow-up of living kidney donors.

    J.S. Najarian;L.E. McHugh;A.J. Matas;B.M. Chavers

  • Lessons learned from more than 1,000 pancreas transplants at a single institution.

    David Sutherland;Rainer Gruessner;David Dunn;Arthur Matas

  • Transplantation of discordant xenografts: a review of progress.

    Jeffrey L Platt;Gregory M Vercellotti;Agustin P Dalmasso;Agustin P Dalmasso;Arthur J Matas

  • OPTN/SRTR 2012 Annual Data Report: kidney.

    A. J. Matas;J. M. Smith;M. A. Skeans;B. Thompson

  • Immunopathology of hyperacute xenograft rejection in a swine-to-primate model.

    Jeffrey Platt;Richard Fischel;Arthur Matas;Sally Reif

  • Excerpts from the United States Renal Data System 2004 annual data report: atlas of end-stage renal disease in the United States.

    Allan J Collins;Bert L Kasiske;Charles A Herzog;Blanche M Chavers

  • Delayed graft function, acute rejection, and outcome after cadaver renal transplantation: A multivariate analysis

    Christoph Troppmann;K. J. Gillingham;E. Benedetti;P. S. Almond

  • Evidence for antibody-mediated injury as a major determinant of late kidney allograft failure.

    Robert S. Gaston;J. Michael Cecka;Bert L. Kasiske;Ann M Fieberg

  • Cell-Free DNA and Active Rejection in Kidney Allografts

    Roy D Bloom;Jonathan S Bromberg;Emilio D Poggio;Suphamai Bunnapradist

  • Preemptive Kidney Transplantation: The Advantage and the Advantaged

    Bertram L. Kasiske;Jon J. Snyder;Arthur J. Matas;Mary D. Ellison

  • OPTN/SRTR 2013 Annual Data Report: kidney.

    Arthur J Matas;J. M. Smith;M. A. Skeans;B. Thompson

  • Morbidity and Mortality After Living Kidney Donation, 1999 2001: Survey of United States Transplant Centers

    Arthur J. Matas;Stephen T. Bartlett;Alan B. Leichtman;Francis L. Delmonico

  • Early versus late acute renal allograft rejection: impact on chronic rejection.

    G. P. Basadonna;Arthur J Matas;Kristen J Gillingham;William D Payne

  • Long-term follow-up of living kidney donors: quality of life after donation.

    Eric Johnson;J. Anderson;Cheryl Jacobs;Gina Suh

  • National conference to assess antibody-mediated rejection in solid organ transplantation.

    Steven K. Takemoto;Adriana Zeevi;Sandy Feng;Robert B. Colvin

  • Prolongation of cardiac xenograft survival by depletion of complement

    Joseph Leventhal;Agustin Dalmasso;John Cromwell;Jeffrey Platt

  • ASTS recommended practice guidelines for controlled donation after cardiac death organ procurement and transplantation.

    D. J. Reich;D. C. Mulligan;P. L. Abt;T. L. Pruett

Frequent Co-Authors

John S. Najarian
John S. Najarian University of Minnesota
David E.R. Sutherland
David E.R. Sutherland University of Minnesota
Ajay K. Israni
Ajay K. Israni University of Minnesota
Bertram L. Kasiske
Bertram L. Kasiske Hennepin County Medical Center
Nancy L. Reinsmoen
Nancy L. Reinsmoen Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
Jon J. Snyder
Jon J. Snyder University of Minnesota
Joseph P. Grande
Joseph P. Grande Mayo Clinic
Philip F. Halloran
Philip F. Halloran University of Alberta
Agustin P. Dalmasso
Agustin P. Dalmasso University of Minnesota

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

Considering a career in Medicine doesn’t always mean attending a traditional medical school. Many students start or advance their healthcare careers with flexible online programs. Options include affordable np programs for those looking to become nurse practitioners, a role in high demand across the U.S.

Students new to the field can pursue the cheapest bsn programs online to quickly earn their bachelor’s in nursing. If you’re already an RN, choosing the cheapest online bsn programs is a cost-effective way to grow your qualifications and increase your earning potential.

For those interested in research, teaching, or leadership roles, phd in nursing online programs allow you to earn the highest degree in the nursing field with maximum flexibility.

These pathways make healthcare careers more accessible and affordable, letting you learn at your own pace while balancing other commitments. Explore these options to find the right fit for your journey in medicine or healthcare.

Best Scientists Citing Arthur J. Matas

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles