World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
95
Citations
41106
World Ranking
9938
National Ranking
5115

Donald S. Baim 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 Donald S. Baim 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: 310 publications — 19th percentile

19% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Donald S. Baim 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 Donald S. Baim 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: 95 D-Index — 51st percentile

51% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Donald S. Baim was affiliated with Harvard University in the United States. Throughout their career, they contributed to scientific research connected to this institution.

Details about their research papers, frequent co-authors, publication venues, fields of study, and main topics of work are not documented in the available data. Consequently, there is no information on the specific scientific areas or subjects that formed the focus of their investigations.

There are no records of book publications or awards received by Donald S. Baim in the provided information. The absence of this data indicates that either such accomplishments were not registered or not publicly recorded in the source materials.

Donald S. Baim is deceased. The profile reflects the information known about their academic background and affiliation without speculative or evaluative content.

Best Publications

  • A Randomized Comparison of Coronary-Stent Placement and Balloon Angioplasty in the Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease

    David L Fischman;Martin B Leon;Donald S Baim;Richard A Schatz

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

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

  • Stent Thrombosis in the Modern Era A Pooled Analysis of Multicenter Coronary Stent Clinical Trials

    Donald E. Cutlip;Donald S. Baim;Kalon K. L. Ho;Jeffrey J. Popma

  • Percutaneous recanalization of chronically occluded coronary arteries: a consensus document: part II.

    Gregg W. Stone;David E. Kandzari;Roxana Mehran;Antonio Colombo

  • Clinical experience with the Palmaz-Schatz coronary stent. Initial results of a multicenter study.

    R A Schatz;D S Baim;M Leon;S G Ellis

  • Incidence and treatment of 'no-reflow' after percutaneous coronary intervention.

    RN Piana;GY Paik;M Moscucci;DJ Cohen

  • Generalized model of restenosis after conventional balloon angioplasty, stenting and directional atherectomy

    Richard E. Kuntz;C.Michael Gibson;Masakiyo Nobuyoshi;Donald S. Baim

  • Transcatheter closure of ventricular septal defects.

    J E Lock;P C Block;R G McKay;D S Baim

  • Impact of Sirolimus-Eluting Stents on Outcome in Diabetic Patients A SIRIUS (SIRolImUS-coated Bx Velocity balloon-expandable stent in the treatment of patients with de novo coronary artery lesions) Substudy

    Issam Moussa;Martin B. Leon;Donald S. Baim;William W. O’Neill

  • Final Results of the Can Routine Ultrasound Influence Stent Expansion (CRUISE) Study

    Peter J. Fitzgerald;Akio Oshima;Motoya Hayase;Jonas A. Metz

  • Clinical restenosis after coronary stenting: perspectives from multicenter clinical trials.

    Donald E Cutlip;Manish S Chauhan;Donald S Baim;Donald S Baim;Kalon K.L Ho;Kalon K.L Ho

  • The importance of acute luminal diameter in determining restenosis after coronary atherectomy or stenting.

    R E Kuntz;R D Safian;J P Carrozza;R F Fishman

  • Current complications of diagnostic and therapeutic cardiac catheterization

    R. Michael Wyman;Robert D. Safian;Valerie Portway;John J. Skillman

  • Angiographic and clinical outcome of intracoronary stenting: Immediate and long-term results from a large single-center experience

    Joseph P. Carrozza;Richard E. Kuntz;Marc J. Levine;Richard M. Pomerantz

  • Evaluation of a New Bipyridine Inotropic Agent — Milrinone — in Patients with Severe Congestive Heart Failure

    D S Baim;D S Baim;A V McDowell;A V McDowell;J Cherniles;J Cherniles;E S Monrad;E S Monrad

  • Beyond restenosis: five-year clinical outcomes from second-generation coronary stent trials.

    Donald E. Cutlip;Amit G. Chhabra;Donald S. Baim;Manish S. Chauhan

  • Restenosis after Arterial Injury Caused by Coronary Stenting in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus

    Joseph P. Carrozza;Richard E. Kuntz;Robert F. Fishman;Donald S. Baim

  • Coronary atherectomy. Clinical, angiographic, and histological findings and observations regarding potential mechanisms.

    R D Safian;J S Gelbfish;R E Erny;S J Schnitt

  • Induction of mild systemic hypothermia with endovascular cooling during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction

    Simon R Dixon;Thanh T Nguyen;William W O’Neill;Robert J Whitbourn

  • Defining coronary restenosis. Newer clinical and angiographic paradigms.

    R E Kuntz;D S Baim

Frequent Co-Authors

Richard E. Kuntz
Richard E. Kuntz Brigham and Women's Hospital
David J. Cohen
David J. Cohen University of Missouri–Kansas City
William Grossman
William Grossman University of California, San Francisco
Stuart J. Schnitt
Stuart J. Schnitt Brigham and Women's Hospital
Martin B. Leon
Martin B. Leon Columbia University Medical Center
Donald E. Cutlip
Donald E. Cutlip Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Jeffrey W. Moses
Jeffrey W. Moses Columbia University Medical Center
Jeffrey J. Popma
Jeffrey J. Popma Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Eugene Braunwald
Eugene Braunwald Harvard Medical School
Paul S. Teirstein
Paul S. Teirstein Scripps Health

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 or complementary pathways in healthcare can be a smart move for anyone interested in studying Medicine in the USA. For students seeking the highest nursing credentials, affordable dnp programs offer a way to advance your career without breaking the bank.

If you want to step into the healthcare field quickly, enrolling in a fast lpn program gives you the skills needed to start working and earning in less time than traditional routes.

Mental health is another crucial area experiencing high demand. Choosing one of the reputable pmhnp online programs can help you specialize and make a meaningful impact.

Not all roles in medicine require direct patient care. Those interested in management or support can look at the cheapest online health science degree options for a cost-effective way to join the industry and lead change in healthcare organizations.

Best Scientists Citing Donald S. Baim

Recently Published Articles