World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
78
Citations
25354
World Ranking
17946
National Ranking
1639

David I. Marks 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 I. Marks 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.

David I. Marks 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 I. Marks 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: 78 D-Index — 12th percentile

12% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

David I. Marks is affiliated with the University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust in the United Kingdom. Their research primarily focuses on the medical field with a significant emphasis on hematology, public health, oncology, genetics, and pediatrics.

Their scholarly output includes a range of publications in influential journals and venues, demonstrating a focus on various hematological and oncological conditions. Frequent publication venues for their work include:

  • Blood
  • UNC Libraries
  • Blood Advances
  • Transplantation and Cellular Therapy
  • Journal of Clinical Oncology

Main topics covered in their research are diverse within hematology and oncology, with particular attention to:

  • Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
  • Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
  • Acute Myeloid Leukemia Research
  • Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
  • CAR-T cell therapy research
  • Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
  • Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research

Notable recent papers authored or co-authored by David I. Marks include:

  • Indications for Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation and Immune Effector Cell Therapy: Guidelines from the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, 2020, Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation
  • Molecular classification improves risk assessment in adult BCR-ABL1-negative B-ALL, 2021, Blood
  • Survival following allogeneic transplant in patients with myelofibrosis, 2020, Blood Advances
  • Management of ALL in adults: 2024 ELN recommendations from a European expert panel, 2024, Blood
  • Haploidentical vs sibling, unrelated, or cord blood hematopoietic cell transplantation for acute lymphoblastic leukemia, 2021, Blood Advances

David I. Marks collaborates frequently with several researchers, reflecting active engagement in the scientific community. Their frequent co-authors include:

  • Wael Saber
  • Hillard M. Lazarus
  • Bipin N. Savani
  • Mahmoud Aljurf
  • Taiga Nishihori

Best Publications

  • Outcomes after transplantation of cord Blood or bone marrow from unrelated donors in adults with leukemia

    Mary J. Laughlin;Mary Eapen;Pablo Rubinstein;John E. Wagner

  • In adults with standard-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia, the greatest benefit is achieved from a matched sibling allogeneic transplantation in first complete remission, and an autologous transplantation is less effective than conventional consolidation/maintenance chemotherapy in all patients: final results of the International ALL Trial (MRC UKALL XII/ECOG E2993)

    Anthony H. Goldstone;Susan M. Richards;Hilliard M. Lazarus;Martin S. Tallman

  • Outcome of 609 adults after relapse of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL); an MRC UKALL12/ECOG 2993 study

    Adele K. Fielding;Susan M. Richards;Rajesh Chopra;Hillard M. Lazarus

  • Apoptosis in mesenchymal stromal cells induces in vivo recipient-mediated immunomodulation.

    Antonio Galleu;Yanira Riffo-Vasquez;Cristina Trento;Cara Lomas

  • Effect of graft source on unrelated donor haemopoietic stem-cell transplantation in adults with acute leukaemia: a retrospective analysis

    Mary Eapen;Vanderson Rocha;Guillermo Sanz;Andromachi Scaradavou

  • Effect of Age on Outcome of Reduced-Intensity Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Older Patients With Acute Myeloid Leukemia in First Complete Remission or With Myelodysplastic Syndrome

    Brian L. McClune;Daniel J. Weisdorf;Tanya L. Pedersen;Gisela Tunes da Silva

  • Hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for acute leukemia in relapse or primary induction failure

    Michel Duval;John P. Klein;Wensheng He;Jean Yves Cahn

  • Early cytomegalovirus reactivation remains associated with increased transplant related mortality in the current era: a CIBMTR analysis

    Pierre Teira;Minoo Battiwalla;Muthalagu Ramanathan;A. John Barrett

  • Indications for Autologous and Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: Guidelines from the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

    Navneet S. Majhail;Stephanie H. Farnia;Paul A. Carpenter;Richard E. Champlin

  • Comparison of autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for follicular lymphoma.

    Koen Van Besien;Fausto R. Loberiza;Ruta Bajorunaite;James O. Armitage

  • T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia in adults: clinical features, immunophenotype, cytogenetics, and outcome from the large randomized prospective trial (UKALL XII/ECOG 2993).

    David I. Marks;Elisabeth M. Paietta;Anthony V. Moorman;Susan M. Richards

  • UKALLXII/ECOG2993: addition of imatinib to a standard treatment regimen enhances long-term outcomes in Philadelphia positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia

    Adele K. Fielding;Jacob M. Rowe;Georgina Buck;Letizia Foroni

  • Impact of immune modulation with anti–T-cell antibodies on the outcome of reduced-intensity allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for hematologic malignancies

    Robert J. Soiffer;Jennifer LeRademacher;Vincent Ho;Fangyu Kan

  • Prospective outcome data on 267 unselected adult patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia confirms superiority of allogeneic transplantation over chemotherapy in the pre-imatinib era: Results from the International ALL Trial MRC UKALLXII/ECOG2993

    Adele K. Fielding;Jacob M. Rowe;Susan M. Richards;Georgina Buck

  • OUTCOME OF TRANSPLANTATION FOR MYELOFIBROSIS

    Karen K. Ballen;Smriti Shrestha;Kathleen A. Sobocinski;Mei Jie Zhang

  • Bone marrow transplantation from HLA-identical siblings as treatment for myelodysplasia.

    Jorge Sierra;Waleska S. Pérez;Ciril Rozman;Enric Carreras

  • Outcome and clinical course of 100 patients with adenovirus infection following bone marrow transplantation

    A. Baldwin;H. Kingman;M. Darville;A. B. M. Foot

  • Voriconazole versus itraconazole for antifungal prophylaxis following allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation

    David I Marks;Antonio Pagliuca;Christopher C Kibbler;Axel Glasmacher

  • Second transplant for acute and chronic leukemia relapsing after first HLA-identical sibling transplant.

    M. Eapen;S. A. Giralt;M. M. Horowitz;J. P. Klein

  • The toxicity and efficacy of donor lymphocyte infusions given after reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic stem cell transplantation.

    David I Marks;Richard Lush;Jamie Cavenagh;Donald W Milligan

Frequent Co-Authors

Hillard M. Lazarus
Hillard M. Lazarus Case Western Reserve University
Bipin N. Savani
Bipin N. Savani Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Mark R. Litzow
Mark R. Litzow Mayo Clinic
Daniel J. Weisdorf
Daniel J. Weisdorf University of Minnesota
Mahmoud Aljurf
Mahmoud Aljurf King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre
Martin S. Tallman
Martin S. Tallman Northwestern University
Mei-Jie Zhang
Mei-Jie Zhang Medical College of Wisconsin
Nigel H. Russell
Nigel H. Russell University of Nottingham
Mary M. Horowitz
Mary M. Horowitz Medical College of Wisconsin
Vikas Gupta
Vikas Gupta Princess Margaret Cancer Centre

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

Considering a career in Medicine doesn’t always mean following a traditional MD path. There are a variety of online degrees and alternative career pathways in the healthcare sector that offer competitive salaries, job stability, and meaningful work.

If you’re interested in the business and administrative side of healthcare, pursuing health administration degrees online can open doors to leadership roles in hospitals and clinics. For those seeking advanced opportunities, several online mha programs affordable exist, combining flexibility with cost-effectiveness.

Nursing professionals might be interested in moving up the clinical ladder with a DNP. The best online bsn to dnp programs allow registered nurses to become advanced practice leaders while working and studying remotely. Alternatively, aspiring pharmacists can reduce education costs by exploring online pharmacy school cost comparisons to find affordable, accredited PharmD programs.

These online degrees can offer more flexible and cost-effective options for ambitious students aiming to make a difference in healthcare—without always taking the traditional medical school path.

Best Scientists Citing David I. Marks

Trending Scientists