World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 93 10656 10005 5478 5062 358 54220

David O. Williams publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by David O. Williams between 1973 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. David O. Williams published across 53 years, from 1973 to 2025, averaging 7 papers a year. Output peaked at 19 publications in 2007. 1 of the 369 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1973 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 19. Peak 19 publications in 2007. 1973: 2 publications 1974: 6 publications 1975: 3 publications 1976: 11 publications 1977: 2 publications 1978: 4 publications 1979: 3 publications 1980: 4 publications 1981: 2 publications 1982: 14 publications 1983: 4 publications 1984: 6 publications 1985: 2 publications 1986: 5 publications 1987: 6 publications 1988: 7 publications 1989: 3 publications 1990: 8 publications 1991: 12 publications 1992: 6 publications 1993: 4 publications 1994: 4 publications 1995: 13 publications 1996: 9 publications 1997: 5 publications 1998: 13 publications 1999: 5 publications 2000: 8 publications 2001: 12 publications 2002: 14 publications 2003: 18 publications 2004: 9 publications 2005: 14 publications 2006: 15 publications 2007: 19 publications 2008: 14 publications 2009: 12 publications 2010: 13 publications 2011: 2 publications 2012: 16 publications 2013: 5 publications 2014: 3 publications 2015: 3 publications 2016: 5 publications 2017: 2 publications 2018: 5 publications 2019: 1 publication 2020: 5 publications 2021: 5 publications 2022: 2 publications 2023: 3 publications 2024: 0 publications 2025: 1 publication
1973 2025

369 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
David O. Williams: publications per year, 1973 to 2025
Year Publications
1973 2
1974 6
1975 3
1976 11
1977 2
1978 4
1979 3
1980 4
1981 2
1982 14
1983 4
1984 6
1985 2
1986 5
1987 6
1988 7
1989 3
1990 8
1991 12
1992 6
1993 4
1994 4
1995 13
1996 9
1997 5
1998 13
1999 5
2000 8
2001 12
2002 14
2003 18
2004 9
2005 14
2006 15
2007 19
2008 14
2009 12
2010 13
2011 2
2012 16
2013 5
2014 3
2015 3
2016 5
2017 2
2018 5
2019 1
2020 5
2021 5
2022 2
2023 3
2024 0
2025 1
Total 369
Download as CSV

David O. Williams 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 O. Williams sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
200 400 600 800
Bar chart with 86 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 101–120 to 1,796+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 922. Most scientists, 922, have 341–360 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 341–360 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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: 610 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
101–120 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 358 publications — 29th percentile

29% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
101–120 5
121–140 26
141–160 73
161–180 155
181–200 230
201–220 363
221–240 487
241–260 545
261–280 722
281–300 768
301–320 834
321–340 895
341–360 922 358
361–380 838
381–400 861
401–420 918
421–440 806
441–460 771
461–480 751
481–500 713
501–520 617
521–540 610
541–560 537
561–580 504
581–600 509
601–620 396
621–640 386
641–660 371
661–680 340
681–700 336
701–720 307
721–740 259
741–760 230
761–780 228
781–800 217
801–820 204
821–840 186
841–860 177
861–880 155
881–900 139
901–920 145
921–940 116
941–960 133
961–980 91
981–1,000 96
1,001–1,020 77
1,021–1,040 70
1,041–1,060 63
1,061–1,080 77
1,081–1,100 49
1,101–1,120 54
1,121–1,140 49
1,141–1,160 51
1,161–1,180 35
1,181–1,200 39
1,201–1,220 26
1,221–1,240 37
1,241–1,260 36
1,261–1,280 27
1,281–1,300 32
1,301–1,320 28
1,321–1,340 17
1,341–1,360 30
1,361–1,380 28
1,381–1,400 17
1,401–1,420 21
1,421–1,440 15
1,441–1,460 12
1,461–1,480 12
1,481–1,500 18
1,501–1,520 14
1,521–1,540 17
1,541–1,560 15
1,561–1,580 6
1,581–1,600 2
1,601–1,620 12
1,621–1,640 11
1,641–1,660 8
1,661–1,680 5
1,681–1,700 5
1,701–1,720 10
1,721–1,740 12
1,741–1,760 14
1,761–1,780 6
1,781–1,795 5
1,796+ 100
Download as CSV

David O. Williams 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 O. Williams sits on this spectrum.

No. of scientists
250 500 750 1,000
Bar chart with 75 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 70–71 to 217+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 1,027. Most scientists, 1,027, have 82–83 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 92–93 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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: 399 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
70–71 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 93 D-Index — 47th percentile

47% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
70–71 226
72–73 391
74–75 574
76–77 730
78–79 891
80–81 972
82–83 1,027
84–85 1,003
86–87 960
88–89 970
90–91 922
92–93 839 93
94–95 808
96–97 779
98–99 668
100–101 611
102–103 630
104–105 513
106–107 541
108–109 445
110–111 429
112–113 399
114–115 393
116–117 318
118–119 302
120–121 287
122–123 255
124–125 256
126–127 252
128–129 230
130–131 179
132–133 168
134–135 163
136–137 159
138–139 134
140–141 134
142–143 118
144–145 109
146–147 106
148–149 74
150–151 79
152–153 80
154–155 87
156–157 57
158–159 74
160–161 69
162–163 60
164–165 53
166–167 39
168–169 42
170–171 32
172–173 39
174–175 40
176–177 28
178–179 19
180–181 23
182–183 31
184–185 18
186–187 20
188–189 22
190–191 13
192–193 21
194–195 12
196–197 12
198–199 14
200–201 15
202–203 13
204–205 10
206–207 8
208–209 4
210–211 12
212–213 11
214–215 10
216 4
217+ 98
Download as CSV

Overview

David O. Williams is affiliated with Brigham and Women's Hospital in the United States. Their research spans primarily across the fields of Medicine and Computer Science, with specializations in Artificial Intelligence, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Health Informatics, and Cancer Research.

Williams has contributed to multiple topics of study, focusing largely on AI applications within medicine. These include:

  • AI in cancer detection
  • Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
  • Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • COVID-19 diagnosis using AI
  • Machine Learning in Healthcare
  • Health and Medical Research Impacts

Their recent publications reflect a strong interest in the integration of artificial intelligence and medical research. Some notable works include:

  • Exploring the Usage of ChatGPT Among Medical Students in the United States, 2024, Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development
  • Digital pathology, deep learning, and cancer: a narrative review, 2024, Translational Cancer Research
  • Breast Cancer Detection Using Mammography: Image Processing to Deep Learning, 2024, IEEE Access
  • Sociodemographic factors and research experience impact MD-PhD program acceptance, 2024, JCI Insight
  • Breast Cancer Detection using Mammography: Image Processing to Deep Learning, 2024, Preprints.org

Williams frequently collaborates with several researchers in the field. Frequently co-authored colleagues include:

  • Mill Etienne
  • Gillian Graifman
  • Nowair Hussain
  • Maytal Amiel
  • Arjun Reddy

Their publications have appeared in various scientific venues such as:

  • Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development
  • Translational Cancer Research
  • IEEE Access
  • JCI Insight
  • Preprints.org

Williams' work notably bridges computer science techniques like artificial intelligence with clinical medicine, particularly targeting cancer detection, diagnostics, and medical education. Their research emphasizes the impact of machine learning in improving healthcare technology and understanding sociodemographic influences in medical training pathways.

Best Publications

  • Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery.

    Jeffrey W. Moses;Martin B. Leon;Jeffrey J. Popma;Peter J. Fitzgerald

  • Universal definition of myocardial infarction.

    Kristian Thygesen;Joseph S. Alpert;Harvey D. White;Allan S. Jaffe

  • 2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update): A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines

    Frederick G. Kushner;Mary Hand;Sidney C. Smith;Spencer B. King

  • 2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update)†

    Frederick G. Kushner;Mary Hand;Sidney C. Smith;Spencer B. King

  • ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention--summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI Writing Committee to update the 2001 Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention).

    Sidney C. Smith;Ted E. Feldman;John W. Hirshfeld;Alice K. Jacobs

  • A Clinical Trial Comparing Three Antithrombotic-Drug Regimens After Coronary Artery Stenting

    Martin B. Leon;Donald S. Baim;Jeffrey J. Popma;Paul C. Gordon

  • Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease.

    David J. Maron;Judith S. Hochman;Harmony R. Reynolds;Sripal Bangalore

  • 2007 Focused update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines

    Spencer B. King;Sidney C. Smith;John W. Hirshfeld;Alice K. Jacobs

  • Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in 1985-1986 and 1977-1981. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Registry.

    Katherine Detre;Richard Holubkov;Sheryl Kelsey;Michael Cowley

  • ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 Guideline Update for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

    Sidney C. Smith;Ted E. Feldman;John W. Hirshfeld;Alice K. Jacobs

  • Prasugrel versus clopidogrel for acute coronary syndromes without revascularization

    Matthew T. Roe;Paul W. Armstrong;Keith A.A. Fox;Harvey D. White

  • ACC/AHA Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Revision of the 1993 PTCA Guidelines)—Executive Summary

    Jr Smith;J. T. Dove;A. K. Jacobs;J. W. Kennedy

  • 2007 Focused Update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 Guideline Update for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

    Unknown

  • ACC/AHA Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Revision of the 1993 PTCA Guidelines)—Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Revise the 1993 Guidelines for Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty) Endorsed by the Society for Cardiac Angiography and Interventions

    Sidney C. Smith;James T. Dove;Alice K. Jacobs;J. Ward Kennedy

  • Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: report of complications from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute PTCA Registry.

    G Dorros;M J Cowley;J Simpson;L G Bentivoglio

  • A Comparison of Directional Atherectomy with Coronary Angioplasty in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease

    Eric J. Topol;Ferdinand Leya;Cass A. Pinkerton;Patrick L. Whitlow

  • Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Transcatheter Occlusion (PLAATO System) to Prevent Stroke in High-Risk Patients With Non-Rheumatic Atrial Fibrillation : Results From the International Multi-Center Feasibility Trials

    Stefan H. Ostermayer;Mark Reisman;Paul H. Kramer;Ray V. Matthews

  • Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty: Report From the Registry of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute

    Kenneth M. Kent;Lamberto G. Bentivoglio;Peter C. Block;Michael J. Cowley

  • The effect of intravenous thrombolytic therapy on left ventricular function: a report on tissue-type plasminogen activator and streptokinase from the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI Phase I) trial.

    F H Sheehan;E Braunwald;P Canner;H T Dodge

  • One-year results of the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) IIIB clinical trial. A randomized comparison of tissue-type plasminogen activator versus placebo and early invasive versus early conservative strategies in unstable angina and non-Q wave Myocardial infarction

    H. Vernon Anderson;Christopher P. Cannon;Peter H. Stone;David O. Williams

Frequent Co-Authors

Sheryl F. Kelsey
Sheryl F. Kelsey University of Pittsburgh
Katherine M. Detre
Katherine M. Detre University of Pittsburgh
Kevin E. Kip
Kevin E. Kip University of South Florida
David R. Holmes
David R. Holmes Mayo Clinic
Alice K. Jacobs
Alice K. Jacobs Boston University
David P. Faxon
David P. Faxon Brigham and Women's Hospital
Robert L. Wilensky
Robert L. Wilensky University of Pennsylvania
Peter C. Block
Peter C. Block Emory University
Ezra A. Amsterdam
Ezra A. Amsterdam University of California, Davis
Eugene Braunwald
Eugene Braunwald Harvard Medical School

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 health career paths beyond a traditional MD can offer flexibility and new opportunities in the healthcare sector. For those interested in leadership positions, earning a health care administration online degree can open doors to managing hospitals, clinics, or public health organizations.

Graduate programs such as the most affordable mha programs are ideal for students aiming for high-level administrative roles. These programs are tailored for professionals seeking to advance their careers while balancing work and life commitments, often available with online learning options.

For those focused on advanced practice, the cheapest dnp programs (Doctor of Nursing Practice) allow nurses to reach top-tier clinical or leadership positions. Similarly, pursuing online pharmacy programs can prepare students for vital roles in medication management and pharmaceutical care.

These online healthcare degrees provide accessible, affordable paths to rewarding careers in medicine, leadership, or research—allowing you to tailor your study to your interests and goals.

Best Scientists Citing David O. Williams

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles