World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Bram Rochwerg

Bram Rochwerg

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 85 14341 13502 600 573 456 51073

Bram Rochwerg publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Bram Rochwerg between 2002 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Bram Rochwerg published across 25 years, from 2002 to 2026, averaging 22.5 papers a year. Output peaked at 80 publications in 2020. 72 of the 563 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
20 40 60 80
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 2002 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 80. Peak 80 publications in 2020. 2002: 1 publication 2003: 0 publications 2004: 0 publications 2005: 0 publications 2006: 0 publications 2007: 0 publications 2008: 1 publication 2009: 0 publications 2010: 0 publications 2011: 0 publications 2012: 1 publication 2013: 1 publication 2014: 6 publications 2015: 15 publications 2016: 17 publications 2017: 33 publications 2018: 36 publications 2019: 48 publications 2020: 80 publications 2021: 73 publications 2022: 60 publications 2023: 53 publications 2024: 66 publications 2025: 69 publications 2026: 3 publications
2002 2026

563 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Bram Rochwerg: publications per year, 2002 to 2026
Year Publications
2002 1
2003 0
2004 0
2005 0
2006 0
2007 0
2008 1
2009 0
2010 0
2011 0
2012 1
2013 1
2014 6
2015 15
2016 17
2017 33
2018 36
2019 48
2020 80
2021 73
2022 60
2023 53
2024 66
2025 69
2026 3
Total 563
Download as CSV

Bram Rochwerg 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 Bram Rochwerg sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600 800
Bar chart with 86 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 101–120 to 1,796+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 922. Most scientists, 922, have 341–360 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 441–460 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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: 610 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
101–120 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 456 publications — 50th percentile

50% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
101–120 5
121–140 26
141–160 73
161–180 155
181–200 230
201–220 363
221–240 487
241–260 545
261–280 722
281–300 768
301–320 834
321–340 895
341–360 922
361–380 838
381–400 861
401–420 918
421–440 806
441–460 771 456
461–480 751
481–500 713
501–520 617
521–540 610
541–560 537
561–580 504
581–600 509
601–620 396
621–640 386
641–660 371
661–680 340
681–700 336
701–720 307
721–740 259
741–760 230
761–780 228
781–800 217
801–820 204
821–840 186
841–860 177
861–880 155
881–900 139
901–920 145
921–940 116
941–960 133
961–980 91
981–1,000 96
1,001–1,020 77
1,021–1,040 70
1,041–1,060 63
1,061–1,080 77
1,081–1,100 49
1,101–1,120 54
1,121–1,140 49
1,141–1,160 51
1,161–1,180 35
1,181–1,200 39
1,201–1,220 26
1,221–1,240 37
1,241–1,260 36
1,261–1,280 27
1,281–1,300 32
1,301–1,320 28
1,321–1,340 17
1,341–1,360 30
1,361–1,380 28
1,381–1,400 17
1,401–1,420 21
1,421–1,440 15
1,441–1,460 12
1,461–1,480 12
1,481–1,500 18
1,501–1,520 14
1,521–1,540 17
1,541–1,560 15
1,561–1,580 6
1,581–1,600 2
1,601–1,620 12
1,621–1,640 11
1,641–1,660 8
1,661–1,680 5
1,681–1,700 5
1,701–1,720 10
1,721–1,740 12
1,741–1,760 14
1,761–1,780 6
1,781–1,795 5
1,796+ 100
Download as CSV

Bram Rochwerg 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 Bram Rochwerg sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
250 500 750 1,000
Bar chart with 75 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 70–71 to 217+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 1,027. Most scientists, 1,027, have 82–83 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 84–85 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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: 399 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
70–71 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 85 D-Index — 29th percentile

29% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
70–71 226
72–73 391
74–75 574
76–77 730
78–79 891
80–81 972
82–83 1,027
84–85 1,003 85
86–87 960
88–89 970
90–91 922
92–93 839
94–95 808
96–97 779
98–99 668
100–101 611
102–103 630
104–105 513
106–107 541
108–109 445
110–111 429
112–113 399
114–115 393
116–117 318
118–119 302
120–121 287
122–123 255
124–125 256
126–127 252
128–129 230
130–131 179
132–133 168
134–135 163
136–137 159
138–139 134
140–141 134
142–143 118
144–145 109
146–147 106
148–149 74
150–151 79
152–153 80
154–155 87
156–157 57
158–159 74
160–161 69
162–163 60
164–165 53
166–167 39
168–169 42
170–171 32
172–173 39
174–175 40
176–177 28
178–179 19
180–181 23
182–183 31
184–185 18
186–187 20
188–189 22
190–191 13
192–193 21
194–195 12
196–197 12
198–199 14
200–201 15
202–203 13
204–205 10
206–207 8
208–209 4
210–211 12
212–213 11
214–215 10
216 4
217+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

Bram Rochwerg is affiliated with McMaster University in Canada, contributing extensively to research in the field of medicine. Their primary areas of study include critical care and intensive care medicine, pulmonary and respiratory medicine, epidemiology, emergency medicine, and surgery.

They have a significant body of work focused on critical care and intensive care medicine, with 121 publications in the subfield, alongside 99 publications in pulmonary and respiratory medicine. Other notable subfields include epidemiology (81 publications), emergency medicine (77 publications), and surgery (63 publications).

Their research spans several main topics, including:

  • Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
  • Respiratory Support and Mechanisms
  • Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation
  • Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
  • COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
  • Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
  • Long-Term Effects of COVID-19

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Bram Rochwerg include:

  • Shannon M. Fernando (66 collaborations)
  • Karen E. A. Burns (57 collaborations)
  • Deborah J. Cook (52 collaborations)
  • François Lamontagne (51 collaborations)
  • Ian Ball (38 collaborations)

Publications have been frequently featured in several venues such as:

  • Critical Care Medicine (36 publications)
  • Canadian Journal of Anesthesia/Journal canadien d anesthésie (29 publications)
  • CHEST Journal (25 publications)
  • Intensive Care Medicine (18 publications)
  • Critical Care Explorations (18 publications)

Among their recent papers are:

  • "A living WHO guideline on drugs for covid-19," 2020, BMJ
  • "Drug treatments for covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis," 2020, BMJ
  • "Timing of Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury," 2020, New England Journal of Medicine
  • "Association of Noninvasive Oxygenation Strategies With All-Cause Mortality in Adults With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure," 2020, JAMA
  • "The role for high flow nasal cannula as a respiratory support strategy in adults: a clinical practice guideline," 2020, Intensive Care Medicine

Best Publications

  • Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock: 2016

    Andrew Rhodes;Laura E. Evans;Waleed Alhazzani;Mitchell M. Levy

  • Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Pain, Agitation/Sedation, Delirium, Immobility, and Sleep Disruption in Adult Patients in the ICU

    John W. Devlin;John W. Devlin;Yoanna Skrobik;Céline Gélinas;Dale M. Needham

  • An Official ATS/ERS/JRS/ALAT Clinical Practice Guideline: Treatment of Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis. An Update of the 2011 Clinical Practice Guideline

    Ganesh Raghu;Bram Rochwerg;Yuan Zhang;Carlos A. Cuello Garcia

  • Official ERS/ATS clinical practice guidelines: noninvasive ventilation for acute respiratory failure

    Bram Rochwerg;Laurent Brochard;Laurent Brochard;Mark W. Elliott;Dean Hess

  • Drug treatments for covid-19: living systematic review and network meta-analysis.

    Reed Ac Siemieniuk;Jessica J Bartoszko;Long Ge;Dena Zeraatkar

  • A living WHO guideline on drugs for covid-19

    Bram Rochwerg;Arnav Agarwal;Reed Ac Siemieniuk;Thomas Agoritsas

  • Timing of Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury.

    Starrt-Aki Investigators

  • Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency (CIRCI) in critically ill patients (Part I): Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) 2017

    Djillali Annane;Stephen M. Pastores;Bram Rochwerg;Wiebke Arlt

  • Advances in the GRADE approach to rate the certainty in estimates from a network meta-analysis

    Romina Brignardello-Petersen;Ashley Bonner;Paul E Alexander;Reed A Siemieniuk

  • Endovascular Thrombectomy for Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Meta-analysis

    Jetan H. Badhiwala;Farshad Nassiri;Waleed Alhazzani;Magdy H. Selim

  • GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks for adoption, adaptation, and de novo development of trustworthy recommendations: GRADE-ADOLOPMENT.

    Holger J. Schünemann;Wojtek Wiercioch;Jan Brozek;Itziar Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta

  • Approaches to interpreting and choosing the best treatments in network meta-analyses

    L. Mbuagbaw;L. Mbuagbaw;B. Rochwerg;R. Jaeschke;D. Heels-Andsell

  • American Society of Hematology 2018 guidelines for management of venous thromboembolism: venous thromboembolism in the context of pregnancy.

    Shannon M. Bates;Anita Rajasekhar;Saskia Middeldorp;Claire McLintock

  • High flow nasal cannula compared with conventional oxygen therapy for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    B. Rochwerg;B. Rochwerg;D. Granton;D. X. Wang;Y. Helviz

  • Fluid Resuscitation in Sepsis: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

    Bram Rochwerg;Waleed Alhazzani;Anees Sindi;Diane Heels-Ansdell

  • Association of Noninvasive Oxygenation Strategies With All-Cause Mortality in Adults With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

    Bruno L Ferreyro;Bruno L Ferreyro;Federico Angriman;Federico Angriman;Laveena Munshi;Laveena Munshi;Lorenzo Del Sorbo;Lorenzo Del Sorbo

  • Effectiveness of therapeutic heparin versus prophylactic heparin on death, mechanical ventilation, or intensive care unit admission in moderately ill patients with covid-19 admitted to hospital: RAPID randomised clinical trial.

    Michelle Sholzberg;Grace H Tang;Hassan Rahhal;Musaad AlHamzah

  • Withholding versus Continuing Angiotensin-converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers before Noncardiac Surgery: An Analysis of the Vascular events In noncardiac Surgery patIents cOhort evaluatioN Prospective Cohort.

    Pavel S. Roshanov;Bram Rochwerg;Ameen Patel;Omid Salehian

  • Prognostic Accuracy of the Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment for Mortality in Patients With Suspected Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

    Shannon M. Fernando;Alexandre Tran;Monica Taljaard;Wei Cheng

  • Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Critical Illness-Related Corticosteroid Insufficiency (CIRCI) in Critically Ill Patients (Part I): Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) 2017

    Annane D;Pastores Sm;Rochwerg B;Arlt W

Frequent Co-Authors

Deborah J. Cook
Deborah J. Cook McMaster University
Gordon H. Guyatt
Gordon H. Guyatt McMaster University
Per Olav Vandvik
Per Olav Vandvik University of Oslo
Djillali Annane
Djillali Annane University of Paris-Saclay
Reem A. Mustafa
Reem A. Mustafa University of Kansas
Maureen O. Meade
Maureen O. Meade McMaster University
Roman Jaeschke
Roman Jaeschke McMaster University
Holger J. Schünemann
Holger J. Schünemann Humanitas University
Lehana Thabane
Lehana Thabane McMaster University
Robert A. Fowler
Robert A. Fowler Sunnybrook Health Science Centre

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

Exploring a medical education doesn't always mean committing to medical school. There are diverse online pathways for those interested in healthcare careers or supportive roles. Several colleges offer programs designed with flexible admission requirements, such as the easiest rn program to get into, which may help students enter the nursing field even with limited prior experience.

For those drawn to the administrative side of healthcare, earning a health care administration degree online can open doors to management roles and higher earning potential, all while allowing learners to balance work or family responsibilities.

Many future healthcare professionals look for accessible nursing schools. Options like enrolling in an lpn school without teas test let students start practical nursing programs without the added pressure of qualifying exams.

If hands-on patient care isn’t your focus, medical billing and coding is a vital, in-demand field. Numerous schools offer programs with financial support, making it easier to get started in this area—check out medical billing and coding financial aid to learn about these opportunities.

Best Scientists Citing Bram Rochwerg

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles