World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
96
Citations
54248
World Ranking
9478
National Ranking
107

Daniel De Backer 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 Daniel De Backer 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: 585 publications — 70th percentile

70% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Daniel De Backer 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 Daniel De Backer 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: 96 D-Index — 53rd percentile

53% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Daniel De Backer is affiliated with the Université Libre de Bruxelles in Belgium. Their research primarily focuses on the field of Medicine, with significant contributions across related subfields such as Surgery, Epidemiology, Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, and Emergency Medicine.

The scientist's work extensively covers topics including Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy, Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment, Cardiac Arrest and Resuscitation, Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes, Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices, Trauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation, and Intensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders.

Daniel De Backer has published in several high-profile medical journals, with frequent articles appearing in:

  • Intensive Care Medicine
  • Critical Care
  • Annals of Intensive Care
  • Critical Care Medicine
  • Intensive Care Medicine Experimental

Among notable recent papers, the following works have been documented:

  • How can assessing hemodynamics help to assess volume status? (2022, Intensive Care Medicine)
  • Current practice and evolving concepts in septic shock resuscitation (2021, Intensive Care Medicine)
  • Pilot trial of high-dose vitamin C in critically ill COVID-19 patients (2021, Annals of Intensive Care)
  • Epidemiology, pathophysiology and contemporary management of cardiogenic shock - a position statement from the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (2020, European Journal of Heart Failure)
  • ESICM guidelines on acute respiratory distress syndrome: definition, phenotyping and respiratory support strategies (2023, Intensive Care Medicine)

The scientist collaborates frequently with several coauthors, including:

  • Maurizio Cecconi
  • Jean-Louis Teboul
  • Jean-Louis Vincent
  • Xavier Monnet
  • Glenn Hernández

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

  • Comparison of Dopamine and Norepinephrine in the Treatment of Shock

    Daniel De Backer;Patrick Biston;Jacques Devriendt;Christian Madl

  • Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine

    Maurizio Cecconi;Daniel De Backer;Massimo Antonelli;Richard Beale

  • Microvascular Blood Flow Is Altered in Patients with Sepsis

    Daniel De Backer;Jacques Creteur;Jean-Charles Preiser;Marc-Jacques Dubois

  • Persistent microcirculatory alterations are associated with organ failure and death in patients with septic shock.

    Yasser Sakr;Marc-Jacques Dubois;Daniel De Backer;Jacques Creteur

  • How to evaluate the microcirculation: report of a round table conference

    Daniel De Backer;Steven Hollenberg;Christiaan Boerma;Peter Goedhart

  • Pulse pressure variations to predict fluid responsiveness: influence of tidal volume

    Daniel De Backer;Sarah Heenen;Michaël Piagnerelli;Marc Koch

  • A Unified Theory of Sepsis-Induced Acute Kidney Injury: Inflammation, microcirculatory dysfunction, bioenergetics and the tubular cell adaptation to injury

    Hernando Gomez;Can Ince;Daniel De Backer;Peter Pickkers

  • Microcirculatory alterations in patients with severe sepsis: impact of time of assessment and relationship with outcome.

    Daniel De Backer;Katia Donadello;Yasser Sakr;Gustavo Adolfo Ospina-Tascón

  • The effects of dobutamine on microcirculatory alterations in patients with septic shock are independent of its systemic effects

    Daniel De Backer;Jacques Creteur;Marc-Jacques Dubois;Yasser Sakr

  • Fluid challenges in intensive care: the FENICE study: A global inception cohort study

    Maurizio Cecconi;Christoph Hofer;Jean-Louis Teboul;Ville Pettila

  • Microvascular alterations in patients with acute severe heart failure and cardiogenic shock.

    Daniel De Backer;Jacques Creteur;Marc-Jacques Dubois;Yasser Sakr

  • THE ENDOTHELIUM IN SEPSIS.

    Can Ince;Philip P.R. Mayeux;Trung Nguyen;Hernando Gomez

  • Clinical review: Update on hemodynamic monitoring--a consensus of 16.

    Jean-Louis Vincent;Andrew Rhodes;Azriel Perel;Greg S Martin

  • Effects of dopamine, norepinephrine, and epinephrine on the splanchnic circulation in septic shock: Which is best?*

    Daniel De Backer;Jacques Creteur;Eliézer Silva;Jean Louis Vincent

  • Monitoring the microcirculation in the critically ill patient: current methods and future approaches.

    Daniel De Backer;Gustavo Adolfo Ospina-Tascón;Diamantino Salgado;Raphaël Favory

  • Does dopamine administration in shock influence outcome? Results of the Sepsis Occurrence in Acutely Ill Patients (SOAP) Study

    Yasser Sakr;Konrad Reinhart;Jean-Louis Vincent;Charles L. Sprung

  • The prognostic value of muscle StO2 in septic patients.

    Jacques Creteur;Tiziana Carollo;Giulia Soldati;Gustavo Luiz Büchele

  • Position paper for the organization of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation programs for acute respiratory failure in adult patients

    Alain Combes;Daniel Brodie;Robert Bartlett;Laurent L.J. Brochard

  • Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care

    Maurizio Cecconi;Daniel De Backer;Massimo Antonelli;Richard Beale

Frequent Co-Authors

Jean Louis Vincent
Jean Louis Vincent Université Libre de Bruxelles
Fabio Silvio Taccone
Fabio Silvio Taccone Université Libre de Bruxelles
Jan Bakker
Jan Bakker New York University
Antoine Vieillard-Baron
Antoine Vieillard-Baron Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines University
Giuseppe Citerio
Giuseppe Citerio University of Milano-Bicocca
Jean-Louis Teboul
Jean-Louis Teboul University of Paris-Saclay
Michael R. Pinsky
Michael R. Pinsky University of Pittsburgh
Andrew Rhodes
Andrew Rhodes St George’s University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Göran Hedenstierna
Göran Hedenstierna Uppsala University

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

For those interested in the medical field but seeking flexible educational paths, there are a range of online degrees and career options to consider. Online programs provide the opportunity to balance learning with work and personal commitments, while giving students access to high-quality education from leading institutions.

Students looking for an affordable healthcare administration degree online can find programs that prepare them for leadership roles in hospitals, clinics, and other health organizations. For further advancement, exploring the cheapest master's in healthcare administration can lead to more specialized and senior positions in the industry.

Nursing professionals aiming to advance their expertise and credentials may consider the cheapest DNP programs available online, which focus on clinical practice and leadership at the doctoral level. Meanwhile, those interested in pharmacy can pursue the cheapest online pharmacy school options to earn their PharmD and enter the world of pharmaceutical care.

These online healthcare degrees not only offer affordability and convenience, but also open up diverse and high-demand career pathways in the U.S. medical field.

Best Scientists Citing Daniel De Backer

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles