World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
82
Citations
31613
World Ranking
15928
National Ranking
8019

David F. Yankelevitz 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 David F. Yankelevitz 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: 507 publications — 59th percentile

59% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

David F. Yankelevitz 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 David F. Yankelevitz 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: 82 D-Index — 21st percentile

21% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

David F. Yankelevitz is affiliated with the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on topics within Medicine, with a strong emphasis on Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine and Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging.

The scientist has contributed extensively to the field of lung cancer diagnosis and treatment, with substantial work also covering radiomics and machine learning in medical imaging. Their research spans several specialized topics including:

  • Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
  • Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
  • Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Advanced X-ray and CT Imaging
  • Head and Neck Cancer Studies

Some of the recent papers associated with work in this domain include:

  • Lung Screening Benefits and Challenges: A Review of The Data and Outline for Implementation (2020), Journal of Thoracic Oncology
  • ACR Lung-RADS v2022: Assessment Categories and Management Recommendations (2023), Journal of the American College of Radiology
  • Low-Dose CT Screening for Lung Cancer: Evidence from 2 Decades of Study (2020), Radiology Imaging Cancer
  • A 20-year Follow-up of the International Early Lung Cancer Action Program (I-ELCAP) (2023), Radiology
  • The Regimen of Computed Tomography Screening for Lung Cancer (2020), Journal of Thoracic Imaging

Frequent collaborators in this research include:

  • Claudia I. Henschke
  • Rowena Yip
  • Anthony P. Reeves
  • Chenyu Zhang
  • Raja M. Flores

Publications often appear in notable venues such as:

  • Journal of Thoracic Oncology
  • Clinical Imaging
  • Circulation
  • Journal of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
  • Radiology

Their subfields of study include Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine with 124 publications, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging with 79 publications, Oncology with 25, Biomedical Engineering and Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine each with 15 publications.

This body of work contributes to ongoing research and clinical practice primarily in the areas of lung cancer screening, imaging techniques, and diagnostic protocols, reflecting interdisciplinary engagement across oncology, radiology, and cardiovascular medicine.

Best Publications

  • Early Lung Cancer Action Project: overall design and findings from baseline screening

    Claudia I Henschke;Dorothy I McCauley;David F Yankelevitz;David P Naidich

  • The Lung Image Database Consortium (LIDC) and Image Database Resource Initiative (IDRI): a completed reference database of lung nodules on CT scans.

    Samuel G. Armato;Geoffrey McLennan;Luc Bidaut;Michael F. McNitt-Gray

  • Survival of patients with stage I lung cancer detected on CT screening.

    Claudia I Henschke;David F Yankelevitz;Daniel M Libby

  • CT Screening for Lung Cancer: Frequency and Significance of Part-Solid and Nonsolid Nodules

    Claudia I Henschke;David F Yankelevitz;Rosna Mirtcheva;Georgeann McGuinness

  • Small Pulmonary Nodules: Volumetrically Determined Growth Rates Based on CT Evaluation

    David F. Yankelevitz;Anthony P. Reeves;William J. Kostis;Binsheng Zhao

  • Early lung cancer action project: initial findings on repeat screenings.

    Claudia I. Henschke;David P. Naidich;David F. Yankelevitz;Georgeann McGuinness

  • System and method for three-dimensional image rendering and analysis

    Anthony P. Reeves;William J. Kostis;Claudia Henschke;David Yankelevitz

  • 2016 SCCT/STR guidelines for coronary artery calcium scoring of noncontrast noncardiac chest CT scans: A report of the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography and Society of Thoracic Radiology.

    Harvey S. Hecht;Paul Cronin;Michael J. Blaha;Matthew J. Budoff

  • CT Screening for Lung Cancer: Suspiciousness of Nodules according to Size on Baseline Scans

    Claudia I. Henschke;David F. Yankelevitz;David P. Naidich;Dorothy I. McCauley

  • Lung image database consortium: developing a resource for the medical imaging research community.

    Samuel G. Armato;Geoffrey McLennan;Michael F. McNitt-Gray;Charles R. Meyer

  • Three-dimensional segmentation and growth-rate estimation of small pulmonary nodules in helical CT images

    W.J. Kostis;A.P. Reeves;D.F. Yankelevitz;C.I. Henschke

  • Ordinal Scoring of Coronary Artery Calcifications on Low-Dose CT Scans of the Chest is Predictive of Death from Cardiovascular Disease

    Joseph Shemesh;Claudia I Henschke;Dorith Shaham;Rowena Yip

  • Celecoxib, a Selective Cyclo-Oxygenase-2 Inhibitor, Enhances the Response to Preoperative Paclitaxel and Carboplatin in Early-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

    Nasser K. Altorki;R. S. Keresztes;J. L. Port;D. M. Libby

  • Deep Venous Thrombosis: Detection by Using Indirect CT Venography

    Matthew D. Cham;David F. Yankelevitz;Dorith Shaham;Ami A. Shah

  • Evolving Concepts in the Pathology and Computed Tomography Imaging of Lung Adenocarcinoma and Bronchioloalveolar Carcinoma

    William D. Travis;Kavita Garg;Wilbur A. Franklin;Ignacio I. Wistuba

  • Small Pulmonary Nodules: Evaluation with Repeat CT—Preliminary Experience

    David F. Yankelevitz;Rajiv Gupta;Binsheng Zhao;Claudia I. Henschke

  • On measuring the change in size of pulmonary nodules

    A.P. Reeves;A.B. Chan;D.F. Yankelevitz;C.I. Henschke

  • Does 2-year stability imply that pulmonary nodules are benign?

    D F Yankelevitz;C I Henschke

  • Small Pulmonary Nodules: Reproducibility of Three-dimensional Volumetric Measurement and Estimation of Time to Follow-up CT

    William J. Kostis;David F. Yankelevitz;Anthony P. Reeves;Simina C. Fluture

  • Managing the Small Pulmonary Nodule Discovered by CT

    Daniel M. Libby;James P. Smith;Nasser K. Altorki;Mark W. Pasmantier

Frequent Co-Authors

Claudia I. Henschke
Claudia I. Henschke Cornell University
Nasser K. Altorki
Nasser K. Altorki Cornell University
Ella A. Kazerooni
Ella A. Kazerooni University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
James P. Smith
James P. Smith Princeton University
Heber MacMahon
Heber MacMahon University of Chicago
Harvey I. Pass
Harvey I. Pass New York University
Jagat Narula
Jagat Narula Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
William D. Travis
William D. Travis Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
David P. Naidich
David P. Naidich New York University
Eric A. Hoffman
Eric A. Hoffman University of Iowa

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

Pursuing a medical career in the USA opens the door to diverse and rewarding opportunities. For students seeking flexible learning and affordable education, online health degrees are gaining popularity. Key options include healthcare management, clinical training, and technology-focused roles.

Students interested in leadership positions can explore cheapest online mha programs, which prepare graduates for healthcare administration careers. Nurses looking to advance their practice may consider a 1 year dnp program online for a fast track to a Doctor of Nursing Practice degree.

For those drawn to pharmaceutical sciences, accredited cheapest online pharmacy school options allow you to study pharmacy from anywhere while minimizing tuition costs. Additionally, students interested in the intersection of healthcare and technology can benefit from health information technology programs online.

These online pathways provide career flexibility, cost savings, and accessibility—helping you play a vital role in the future of medicine across multiple settings.

Best Scientists Citing David F. Yankelevitz

Trending Scientists