World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
89
Citations
26844
World Ranking
12771
National Ranking
6526

Dan Jones 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 Dan Jones 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: 360 publications — 30th percentile

30% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Dan Jones 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 Dan Jones 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: 89 D-Index — 38th percentile

38% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Dan Jones is affiliated with The Ohio State University in the United States. Their research spans primarily the fields of Medicine and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, with a strong focus on Genetics, Oncology, Cancer Research, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, and Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine as subfields of study.

The scientist's work covers several main topics, including:

  • Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
  • Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
  • Pancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
  • Sarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment

Dan Jones has contributed to multiple publications, frequently publishing in the following venues:

  • Blood Advances
  • Modern Pathology
  • Blood
  • Hematological Oncology
  • Genes Chromosomes and Cancer

Their recent published papers include the following:

  • "Prospective Statewide Study of Universal Screening for Hereditary Colorectal Cancer: The Ohio Colorectal Cancer Prevention Initiative" (2021), published in JCO Precision Oncology
  • "Midostaurin in patients with acute myeloid leukemia and FLT3-TKD mutations: a subanalysis from the RATIFY trial" (2020), published in Blood Advances
  • "Double somatic mismatch repair gene pathogenic variants as common as Lynch syndrome among endometrial cancer patients" (2020), published in Gynecologic Oncology
  • "Recent advances in the diagnostic evaluation of pancreatic cystic lesions" (2022), published in World Journal of Gastroenterology
  • "Electronic Health Records and Genomics" (2021), published in Journal of Molecular Diagnostics

Dan Jones collaborates frequently with several co-authors, including:

  • Weiqiang Zhao
  • Matthew R. Avenarius
  • Jennifer A. Woyach
  • Wendy L. Frankel
  • Somashekar G. Krishna

Best Publications

  • Impaired B-lymphopoiesis, myelopoiesis, and derailed cerebellar neuron migration in CXCR4- and SDF-1-deficient mice

    Qing Ma;Dan Jones;Paul R. Borghesani;Rosalind A. Segal

  • Differentiation and reversal of malignant changes in colon cancer through PPARgamma.

    Pasha Sarraf;Elisabetta Mueller;Daniel Jones;Frederick J. King

  • The chemokine receptor CXCR4 is required for the retention of B lineage and granulocytic precursors within the bone marrow microenvironment.

    Qing Ma;Dan Jones;Timothy A Springer

  • Frequency and clinical significance of BCR-ABL mutations in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia treated with imatinib mesylate

    E. Jabbour;H. Kantarjian;D. Jones;M. Talpaz

  • BTKC481S-Mediated Resistance to Ibrutinib in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

    Jennifer A. Woyach;Amy S. Ruppert;Daphne Guinn;Amy Lehman

  • Phase I/II Study of Combination Therapy With Sorafenib, Idarubicin, and Cytarabine in Younger Patients With Acute Myeloid Leukemia

    Farhad Ravandi;Jorge E Cortes;Daniel Jones;Stefan H Faderl

  • Use of all-trans retinoic acid plus arsenic trioxide as an alternative to chemotherapy in untreated acute promyelocytic leukemia.

    Elihu Estey;Guillermo Garcia-Manero;Alessandra Ferrajoli;Stefan Faderl

  • MK-0457, a novel kinase inhibitor, is active in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia or acute lymphocytic leukemia with the T315I BCR-ABL mutation.

    Francis J. Giles;Jorge E Cortes;Dan Jones;Donald A Bergstrom

  • Effective Treatment of Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia With All-Trans-Retinoic Acid, Arsenic Trioxide, and Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin

    Farhad Ravandi;Eli Estey;Dan Jones;Stefan Faderl

  • First report of phase 2 study of dasatinib with hyper-CVAD for the frontline treatment of patients with Philadelphia chromosome–positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia

    Farhad Ravandi;Susan O'Brien;Deborah Thomas;Stefan Faderl

  • Dynamics of BCR-ABL kinase domain mutations in chronic myeloid leukemia after sequential treatment with multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

    Jorge E Cortes;Elias Joseph Jabbour;Hagop M Kantarjian;Cheng Cameron Yin

  • Marek disease virus encodes a basic-leucine zipper gene resembling the fos/jun oncogenes that is highly expressed in lymphoblastoid tumors.

    Dan Jones;Lucy Lee;Juinn Lin Liu;Hsing-Jien Kung

  • Molecular responses in patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia in chronic phase treated with imatinib mesylate

    Jorge Cortes;Moshe Talpaz;Susan O'Brien;Dan Jones

  • Results of Dasatinib Therapy in Patients With Early Chronic-Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia

    Jorge E. Cortes;Dan Jones;Susan O'Brien;Elias Jabbour

  • Nilotinib As Front-Line Treatment for Patients With Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Early Chronic Phase

    Jorge E. Cortes;Dan Jones;Susan O'Brien;Elias Jabbour

  • Lenalidomide therapy in myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia.

    Ayalew Tefferi;Jorge E Cortes;Jorge E Cortes;Jorge E Cortes;Srdan Verstovsek;Srdan Verstovsek;Srdan Verstovsek;Ruben A. Mesa;Ruben A. Mesa;Ruben A. Mesa

  • Survival benefit with imatinib mesylate versus interferon-α–based regimens in newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myelogenous leukemia

    Hagop M. Kantarjian;Moshe Talpaz;Susan O'Brien;Daniel Jones

  • Absence of CD26 Expression Is a Useful Marker for Diagnosis of T-Cell Lymphoma in Peripheral Blood

    Dan Jones;Nam H. Dang;Madeleine Duvic;La Baron T. Washington

  • Long-term survival benefit and improved complete cytogenetic and molecular response rates with imatinib mesylate in Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia after failure of interferon-α

    Hagop M. Kantarjian;Jorge E. Cortes;Susan O'Brien;Rajyalakshmi Luthra

  • Imatinib mesylate dose escalation is associated with durable responses in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia after cytogenetic failure on standard-dose imatinib therapy.

    Elias Jabbour;Hagop M. Kantarjian;Dan Jones;Jenny Shan

Frequent Co-Authors

Hagop M. Kantarjian
Hagop M. Kantarjian The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Jorge E. Cortes
Jorge E. Cortes Augusta University
Susan O'Brien
Susan O'Brien University of California, Irvine
L. Jeffrey Medeiros
L. Jeffrey Medeiros The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Srdan Verstovsek
Srdan Verstovsek The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Guillermo Garcia-Manero
Guillermo Garcia-Manero The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Stefan Faderl
Stefan Faderl The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Farhad Ravandi
Farhad Ravandi The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Francis J. Giles
Francis J. Giles Northwestern University
Rajyalakshmi Luthra
Rajyalakshmi Luthra 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

Exploring a career in Medicine opens up a diverse range of academic pathways, many of which can now be pursued online. For registered nurses aiming to advance their qualifications, programs like asn to fnp programs offer a streamlined route from an associate degree to becoming a Family Nurse Practitioner—greatly expanding career options.

Interested in preventative healthcare? Pursuing an online nutritionist degree can equip you with the skills needed to guide patients on healthy eating and wellness, a vital aspect of modern healthcare.

Accreditation is critical when choosing an online program. Prospective leaders should consider which online healthcare degree programs are recognized for their accreditation by cahme? to ensure a strong reputation and transferability of their qualifications.

For working nurses, flexibility is important. There are also options for rn to bsn online programs without clinicals, which allow professionals to advance their education without the need for on-site clinical work.

These online degrees offer accessible pathways to specialized roles within the U.S. healthcare system, supporting a broad range of interests and career goals.

Best Scientists Citing Dan Jones

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles