World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
88
Citations
47111
World Ranking
12909
National Ranking
6598

Daniel G. Haller 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 G. Haller 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: 339 publications — 25th percentile

25% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Daniel G. Haller 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 G. Haller 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: 88 D-Index — 36th percentile

36% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Daniel G. Haller is affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania in the United States and has contributed substantially to the field of medicine, with a particular focus on oncology.

Their research prominently addresses colorectal cancer treatments and studies, with notable attention to surgical treatments and genetic factors related to colorectal cancer. Other main topics in their work include gastric cancer management and outcomes, colorectal cancer screening and detection, colorectal and anal carcinomas, as well as pancreatic and hepatic oncology research.

Haller has published extensively in the discipline of oncology, with specific subfields including pulmonary and respiratory medicine, pathology and forensic medicine, surgery, and cancer research.

Frequent publication venues for their research include:

  • Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • UNC Libraries
  • JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
  • Clinical Colorectal Cancer
  • JAMA Oncology

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Haller are:

  • Aimery de Gramont (13 publications)
  • Thierry André (12 publications)
  • Qian Shi (12 publications)
  • Richard M. Goldberg (11 publications)
  • Greg Yothers (10 publications)

Significant recent publications by Daniel G. Haller include:

  • "Microsatellite Instability in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer Receiving Fluoropyrimidine With or Without Oxaliplatin: An ACCENT Pooled Analysis of 12 Adjuvant Trials", 2020, Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • "Sex and Adverse Events of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Colon Cancer: An Analysis of 34,640 Patients in the ACCENT Database", 2020, JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
  • "Prognostic Impact of Early Treatment and Oxaliplatin Discontinuation in Patients With Stage III Colon Cancer: An ACCENT/IDEA Pooled Analysis of 11 Adjuvant Trials", 2022, Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • "Clinicopathological and Molecular Characteristics of Early-Onset Stage III Colon Adenocarcinoma: An Analysis of the ACCENT Database", 2021, JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
  • "Benefit of Oxaliplatin in Stage III Colon Cancer According to IDEA Risk Groups: Findings from the ACCENT Database of 4934 Patients", 2021, Clinical Colorectal Cancer

Best Publications

  • Chemoradiotherapy after Surgery Compared with Surgery Alone for Adenocarcinoma of the Stomach or Gastroesophageal Junction

    John S. Macdonald;Stephen R. Smalley;Jacqueline Benedetti;Scott A. Hundahl

  • Levamisole and Fluorouracil for Adjuvant Therapy of Resected Colon Carcinoma

    Moertel Cg;Fleming Tr;Macdonald Js;Haller Dg

  • American Society of Clinical Oncology Recommendations on Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II Colon Cancer

    Al B. Benson;Deborah Schrag;Mark R. Somerfield;Alfred M. Cohen

  • Chemotherapy followed by surgery compared with surgery alone for localized esophageal cancer

    David P. Kelsen;Robert Ginsberg;Thomas F. Pajak;Daniel G. Sheahan

  • Improving adjuvant therapy for rectal cancer by combining protracted-infusion fluorouracil with radiation therapy after curative surgery

    Michael J. O'Connell;James A. Martenson;Harry S. Wieand;James E. Krook

  • Colon Cancer Survival Is Associated With Increasing Number of Lymph Nodes Analyzed: A Secondary Survey of Intergroup Trial INT-0089

    T.E. Le Voyer;E.R. Sigurdson;A.L. Hanlon;R.J. Mayer

  • Pooled analysis of fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy for stage II and III colon cancer: who benefits and by how much?

    Sharlene Gill;Charles L. Loprinzi;Daniel J. Sargent;Stephan D. Thomé

  • Fluorouracil plus Levamisole as Effective Adjuvant Therapy after Resection of Stage III Colon Carcinoma: A Final Report

    Charles G. Moertel;Thomas R. Fleming;John S. Macdonald;Daniel G. Haller

  • A pooled analysis of adjuvant chemotherapy for resected colon cancer in elderly patients.

    Daniel J. Sargent;Richard M. Goldberg;Stacy D. Jacobson;John S. Macdonald

  • Molecular predictors of survival after adjuvant chemotherapy for colon cancer.

    Toshiaki Watanabe;Tsung Teh Wu;Paul J. Catalano;Paul J. Catalano;Takashi Ueki

  • Phase III Study of Gemcitabine in Combination With Fluorouracil Versus Gemcitabine Alone in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Carcinoma: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial E2297

    Jordan D. Berlin;Paul Catalano;James P. Thomas;John W. Kugler

  • Updated Analysis of SWOG-Directed Intergroup Study 0116: A Phase III Trial of Adjuvant Radiochemotherapy Versus Observation After Curative Gastric Cancer Resection

    Stephen R. Smalley;Jacqueline K. Benedetti;Daniel G. Haller;Scott A. Hundahl

  • Superiority of Oxaliplatin and Fluorouracil-Leucovorin Compared With Either Therapy Alone in Patients With Progressive Colorectal Cancer After Irinotecan and Fluorouracil-Leucovorin: Interim Results of a Phase III Trial

    Mace L. Rothenberg;Amit M. Oza;Robert H. Bigelow;Jordan D. Berlin

  • Capecitabine Plus Oxaliplatin Compared With Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid As Adjuvant Therapy for Stage III Colon Cancer

    Daniel G. Haller;Josep Tabernero;Jean Maroun;Filippo De Braud

  • Disease-Free Survival Versus Overall Survival As a Primary End Point for Adjuvant Colon Cancer Studies: Individual Patient Data From 20,898 Patients on 18 Randomized Trials

    Daniel J. Sargent;Harry S. Wieand;Daniel G. Haller;Richard Gray

  • Controlled trial of fluorouracil and low-dose leucovorin given for 6 months as postoperative adjuvant therapy for colon cancer.

    M J O'Connell;J A Mailliard;M J Kahn;J S Macdonald

  • Evidence for Cure by Adjuvant Therapy in Colon Cancer: Observations Based on Individual Patient Data From 20,898 Patients on 18 Randomized Trials

    Daniel Sargent;Alberto Sobrero;Axel Grothey;Michael J. O'Connell

  • Long-term results of RTOG trial 8911 (USA intergroup 113): A random assignment trial comparison of chemotherapy followed by surgery compared with surgery alone for esophageal cancer

    David P. Kelsen;Katryn A. Winter;Leonard L. Gunderson;Joanne Mortimer

  • Colon Cancer Survival Is Associated With Decreasing Ratio of Metastatic to Examined Lymph Nodes

    Adam C. Berger;Elin R. Sigurdson;Thomas LeVoyer;Alexandra Hanlon

  • An Evaluation of the Carcinoembryonic Antigen (CEA) Test for Monitoring Patients With Resected Colon Cancer

    Charles G. Moertel;Thomas R. Fleming;John S. Macdonald;Daniel G. Haller

Frequent Co-Authors

Al B. Benson
Al B. Benson Northwestern University
Paul J. Catalano
Paul J. Catalano Harvard University
Robert J. Mayer
Robert J. Mayer Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
Richard M. Goldberg
Richard M. Goldberg West Virginia University
Peter J. O'Dwyer
Peter J. O'Dwyer University of Pennsylvania
Roberto Labianca
Roberto Labianca Mario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research
Josep Tabernero
Josep Tabernero Vall d´Hebron Institute of Oncology
Hans-Joachim Schmoll
Hans-Joachim Schmoll Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg

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 alternative online degrees can help you diversify your skill set and career opportunities in the healthcare field. If you’re interested in preventative medicine and nutrition, an online bs in nutrition can provide a strong foundation in dietary science and health promotion for a variety of roles.

For those pursuing healthcare leadership or administration, there are accredited mha programs that prepare graduates for management jobs in hospitals and clinics. These programs offer flexibility for working professionals, while ensuring that studies meet high accreditation standards.

Registered nurses looking for advancement may benefit from rn to bsn online no clinicals accredited options. These accredited programs are tailored for RNs who need a flexible, clinical-free pathway to earn their BSN.

If you’re aiming for the peak of nursing practice, accelerated dnp programs provide an efficient route to a Doctor of Nursing Practice. These online pathways help experienced nurses move quickly into advanced leadership, education, or clinical roles.

Best Scientists Citing Daniel G. Haller

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles