World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

Charles E. Cox 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 Charles E. Cox 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+

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

Charles E. Cox 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 Charles E. Cox 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+

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

Overview

Charles E. Cox is affiliated with the University of South Florida in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on aspects of breast cancer, including treatment studies, diagnosis, and genetics. Their work integrates fields such as biochemistry, genetics, molecular biology, and medicine, with a significant emphasis on cancer research and oncology.

The main topics covered in their publications include:

  • Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
  • Breast Lesions and Carcinomas
  • Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • BRCA Gene Mutations in Cancer
  • Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Immunotherapy and Immune Responses

The primary fields of study associated with their research are:

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
  • Medicine

Subfields of study include:

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology
  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Genetics
  • Immunology

Frequent publication venues where Charles E. Cox has contributed include:

  • Cancer Research
  • Annals of Surgical Oncology
  • Journal of Clinical Oncology

Their most recent papers feature studies relevant to breast cancer treatment and prognostic methods:

  • The Predictive Utility of MammaPrint and BluePrint in Identifying Patients with Locally Advanced Breast Cancer Who are Most Likely to Have Nodal Downstaging and a Pathologic Complete Response After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy (2023, Annals of Surgical Oncology)
  • Abstract OT3-09-03: The PREDICT registry: A prospective registry study to evaluate the effect of the DCISionRT test on treatment decisions in patients with DCIS following breast conserving therapy (2020, Cancer Research)
  • 12-chemokine gene expression score in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (2020, Journal of Clinical Oncology)
  • Abstract PS6-41: Mammaprint and blueprint as prognostic indicators for elderly patients with early stage breast cancer (2021, Cancer Research)
  • Abstract PS6-17: Clinical utility of a biologic signature to assess DCIS recurrence risk in patients meeting 'good-risk' criteria (RTOG 9804, ECOG 5194): Interim analysis of the DCISionRT PREDICT study (2021, Cancer Research)

Charles E. Cox has collaborated frequently with several coauthors, including:

  • Steven C. Shivers
  • Pat W. Whitworth
  • Troy Bremer
  • Géza Ács
  • Rakesh Patel

Best Publications

  • Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in the patient with breast cancer

    John J. Albertini;Gary H. Lyman;Charles Cox;Tim Yeatman

  • Constitutive activation of Stat3 by the Src and JAK tyrosine kinases participates in growth regulation of human breast carcinoma cells.

    Roy Garcia;Tammy L Bowman;Guilian Niu;Hua Yu

  • The orderly progression of melanoma nodal metastases.

    Douglas Reintgen;C. Cruse;Karen Wells;Claudia Berman

  • Guidelines for sentinel node biopsy and lymphatic mapping of patients with breast cancer.

    Charles E. Cox;Solange Pendas;John M. Cox;Emmanuella Joseph

  • Randomized controlled trial of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) for survivors of breast cancer

    Cecile A. Lengacher;Versie Johnson-Mallard;Janice Post-White;Manolete S. Moscoso

  • Surgical Complications Associated With Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy: Results From a Prospective International Cooperative Group Trial

    Lee Gravatt Wilke;Linda M. McCall;Katherine E. Posther;Pat W. Whitworth

  • Breast cancer: Clinical practice guidelines in oncology

    Robert W. Carlson;Benjamin O. Anderson;Harold J. Burstein;Charles E. Cox

  • The Caregiver Quality of Life Index–Cancer (CQOLC) scale: development and validation of an instrument to measure quality of life of the family caregiver of patients with cancer

    M. A. Weitzner;P. B. Jacobsen;H. Wagner;J. Friedland

  • Randomized prospective evaluation of a novel technique for biopsy or lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast lesions: radioactive seed versus wire localization.

    Richard J. Gray;Christopher Salud;Keoni Nguyen;Emilia Dauway

  • Influence of physician communication on newly diagnosed breast patients' psychologic adjustment and decision-making

    Cleora S. Roberts;Charles E. Cox;Douglas S. Reintgen;Walter F. Baile

  • Are Mastectomies on the Rise? A 13-Year Trend Analysis of the Selection of Mastectomy Versus Breast Conservation Therapy in 5865 Patients

    Kandace P. McGuire;Alfredo A. Santillan;Paramjeet Kaur;Tammi Meade

  • Activation of Stat3 in Primary Tumors from High-Risk Breast Cancer Patients Is Associated with Elevated Levels of Activated Src and Survivin Expression

    Nills Diaz;Susan Minton;Charles Cox;Tammy Bowman

  • Redefinition of cutaneous lymphatic drainage with the use of lymphoscintigraphy for malignant melanoma.

    James Norman;C.Wayne Cruse;Carmen Espinosa;Charles Cox

  • Randomized Trial Using Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonist Triptorelin for the Preservation of Ovarian Function During (Neo)Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer

    Pamela N. Munster;Amy P. Moore;Roohi Ismail-Khan;Charles E. Cox

  • The role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer.

    Siddharth S Bass;Charles E Cox;Ni Ni Ku;Claudia Berman

  • Importance of lymphatic mapping in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): why map DCIS?

    Charles E. Cox;Keoni Nguyen;Richard J. Gray;Christopher Salud

  • Sentinel node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ patients.

    Solange Pendas;Emilia Dauway;Rosemary Giuliano;NiNi Ku

  • A Randomized Trial Comparing Surgical Adrenalectomy with Aminoglutethimide plus Hydrocortisone in Women with Advanced Breast Cancer

    Richard J. Santen;Thomas J. Worgul;Eugeniusz Samojlik;Albert Interrante

  • Abdominal obesity and breast cancer risk.

    David V. Schapira;Nagi B. Kumar;Gary H. Lyman;Charles E. Cox

  • Examination of Broad Symptom Improvement Resulting From Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction in Breast Cancer Survivors: A Randomized Controlled Trial

    Cecile A. Lengacher;Richard R. Reich;Carly L. Paterson;Sophia Ramesar

Frequent Co-Authors

Douglas S. Reintgen
Douglas S. Reintgen University of South Florida
Alan B. Cantor
Alan B. Cantor Harvard University
Gary H. Lyman
Gary H. Lyman Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
Paul B. Jacobsen
Paul B. Jacobsen National Institutes of Health
Kevin E. Kip
Kevin E. Kip University of South Florida
Lodovico Balducci
Lodovico Balducci University of South Florida
Richard Gray
Richard Gray University of Oxford
Thomas W. Klein
Thomas W. Klein University of South Florida
Richard Heller
Richard Heller University of South Florida
Kelly K. Hunt
Kelly K. Hunt The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

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 are exploring a future in healthcare but are looking for flexible alternatives to the traditional route, there are several online degrees and career paths worth considering. For individuals without a nursing background, direct entry msn programs for non-nurses online offer an accelerated way to enter advanced nursing roles. These programs allow career changers to fast-track their move into nursing without first earning a BSN.

Admission requirements can vary widely. Some learners seek the easiest nursing programs to get into, which might have higher acceptance rates or fewer prerequisites. Additionally, for those worried about standardized tests, there are do you have to take the teas test to get into nursing school resources that clarify which schools do not require the TEAS or HESI exams.

Beyond nursing, roles like medical billing and coding are in strong demand. These positions can often be pursued entirely online and frequently offer financial aid for medical billing and coding students. Exploring these alternative online pathways can lead to rewarding healthcare careers with greater flexibility and diverse entry points.

Best Scientists Citing Charles E. Cox

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles