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 147 1292 1194 744 677 630 78333

Douglas P. Kiel publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Douglas P. Kiel between 1978 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Douglas P. Kiel published across 48 years, from 1978 to 2025, averaging 14.7 papers a year. Output peaked at 41 publications in 2020. 51 of the 705 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30 40
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1978 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 41. Peak 41 publications in 2020. 1978: 1 publication 1979: 0 publications 1980: 0 publications 1981: 0 publications 1982: 0 publications 1983: 0 publications 1984: 0 publications 1985: 2 publications 1986: 1 publication 1987: 0 publications 1988: 4 publications 1989: 2 publications 1990: 3 publications 1991: 3 publications 1992: 1 publication 1993: 6 publications 1994: 4 publications 1995: 3 publications 1996: 4 publications 1997: 9 publications 1998: 9 publications 1999: 3 publications 2000: 11 publications 2001: 7 publications 2002: 13 publications 2003: 8 publications 2004: 12 publications 2005: 9 publications 2006: 19 publications 2007: 27 publications 2008: 22 publications 2009: 27 publications 2010: 30 publications 2011: 28 publications 2012: 29 publications 2013: 28 publications 2014: 32 publications 2015: 19 publications 2016: 29 publications 2017: 39 publications 2018: 39 publications 2019: 36 publications 2020: 41 publications 2021: 40 publications 2022: 31 publications 2023: 23 publications 2024: 29 publications 2025: 22 publications
1978 2025

705 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Douglas P. Kiel: publications per year, 1978 to 2025
Year Publications
1978 1
1979 0
1980 0
1981 0
1982 0
1983 0
1984 0
1985 2
1986 1
1987 0
1988 4
1989 2
1990 3
1991 3
1992 1
1993 6
1994 4
1995 3
1996 4
1997 9
1998 9
1999 3
2000 11
2001 7
2002 13
2003 8
2004 12
2005 9
2006 19
2007 27
2008 22
2009 27
2010 30
2011 28
2012 29
2013 28
2014 32
2015 19
2016 29
2017 39
2018 39
2019 36
2020 41
2021 40
2022 31
2023 23
2024 29
2025 22
Total 705
Download as CSV

Douglas P. Kiel 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 Douglas P. Kiel 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, 621–640 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: 630 publications — 75th percentile

75% 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
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
621–640 386 630
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

Douglas P. Kiel 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 Douglas P. Kiel 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, 146–147 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: 147 D-Index — 94th percentile

94% 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
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
146–147 106 147
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

Douglas P. Kiel is affiliated with the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in the United States. Their research primarily falls within the field of Medicine, with a focus on several subfields including Orthopedics and Sports Medicine, Physiology, Surgery, Molecular Biology, and Genetics.

The main topics covered in their work include bone health and osteoporosis research, nutrition and health in aging, hip and femur fractures, frailty in older adults, nutritional studies and diet, genetic associations and epidemiology, and body composition measurement techniques.

Douglas P. Kiel has contributed to multiple publications in prominent research venues. The frequent publication outlets include:

  • Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
  • UNC Libraries
  • Osteoporosis International
  • The Journals of Gerontology Series A
  • Journal of the American Geriatrics Society

Some recent papers published by Douglas P. Kiel include the following:

  • Sequencing of 53,831 diverse genomes from the NHLBI TOPMed Program, 2021, Nature
  • Sarcopenia Definition: The Position Statements of the Sarcopenia Definition and Outcomes Consortium, 2020, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
  • Global Epidemiology of Hip Fractures: Secular Trends in Incidence Rate, Post-Fracture Treatment, and All-Cause Mortality, 2023, Journal of Bone and Mineral Research
  • The Conceptual Definition of Sarcopenia: Delphi Consensus from the Global Leadership Initiative in Sarcopenia (GLIS), 2024, Age and Ageing
  • Validation of biomarkers of aging, 2024, Nature Medicine

Douglas P. Kiel has collaborated frequently with several coauthors. Among those with the highest number of joint publications are Marian T. Hannan, Shivani Sahni, David Karasik, Fernando Rivadeneira, and Sarah D. Berry.

Best Publications

  • The FNIH Sarcopenia Project: Rationale, Study Description, Conference Recommendations, and Final Estimates

    Stephanie A. Studenski;Katherine W. Peters;Dawn E. Alley;Peggy M. Cawthon

  • Sequencing of 53,831 diverse genomes from the NHLBI TOPMed Program.

    Daniel Taliun;Daniel N. Harris;Michael D. Kessler;Jedidiah Carlson;Jedidiah Carlson

  • Common genetic determinants of vitamin D insufficiency: a genome-wide association study

    Thomas J. Wang;Feng Zhang;J. Brent Richards;Bryan Kestenbaum

  • Fall prevention with supplemental and active forms of vitamin D: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

    Heike A. Bischoff-Ferrari;B. Dawson-Hughes;Hannes B. Staehelin;John E. Orav

  • A randomized trial of nasal spray salmon calcitonin in postmenopausal women with established osteoporosis: the prevent recurrence of osteoporotic fractures study

    Charles H Chesnut;Stuart Silverman;Kim Andriano;Harry Genant

  • Genome-wide meta-analysis identifies 56 bone mineral density loci and reveals 14 loci associated with risk of fracture

    Karol Estrada;Unnur Styrkarsdottir;Evangelos Evangelou;Yi-Hsiang Hsu

  • DNA methylation-based measures of biological age: meta-analysis predicting time to death

    Brian H. Chen;Riccardo E. Marioni;Riccardo E. Marioni;Elena Colicino;Marjolein J. Peters

  • Prevention of Nonvertebral Fractures With Oral Vitamin D and Dose Dependency: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

    Heike A. Bischoff-Ferrari;Walter C. Willett;John B. Wong;Andreas E. Stuck

  • Potassium, magnesium, and fruit and vegetable intakes are associated with greater bone mineral density in elderly men and women

    K. L. Tucker;M. T. Hannan;Honglei Chen;L. A. Cupples

  • Hip Fracture and the Use of Estrogens in Postmenopausal Women: The Framingham Study

    Douglas P. Kiel;David T. Felson;Jennifer J. Anderson;Peter W. F. Wilson

  • Risk factors for longitudinal bone loss in elderly men and women: the Framingham Osteoporosis Study.

    Marian T. Hannan;Marian T. Hannan;David T. Felson;Bess Dawson-Hughes;Katherine L. Tucker

  • Epigenetic Signatures of Cigarette Smoking

    Roby Joehanes;Allan C. Just;Riccardo E. Marioni;Luke C. Pilling

  • The Effect of Postmenopausal Estrogen Therapy on Bone Density in Elderly Women

    David T. Felson;Yuqing Zhang;Marian T. Hannan;Douglas P. Kiel

  • Homocysteine as a Predictive Factor for Hip Fracture in Older Persons

    Robert R McLean;Paul F Jacques;Jacob Selhub;Katherine L Tucker

  • New indices to classify location, severity and progression of calcific lesions in the abdominal aorta : a 25-year follow-up study

    L. I. Kauppila;J. F. Polak;L. A. Cupples;M. T. Hannan

  • Abdominal Aortic Calcific Deposits Are an Important Predictor of Vascular Morbidity and Mortality

    Peter W. F. Wilson;Leena I. Kauppila;Christopher J. O’Donnell;Douglas P. Kiel

  • Comparison of the effect of denosumab and alendronate on BMD and biochemical markers of bone turnover in postmenopausal women with low bone mass: a randomized, blinded, phase 3 trial.

    Jacques P. Brown;Richard L. Prince;Chad L Deal;Robert R. Recker

  • Twenty bone mineral-density loci identified by large-scale meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies

    Fernando Rivadeneira;Unnur Styrkarsdottir;Karol Estrada;Bjarni V. Halldorsson

  • Effect of Dietary Protein on Bone Loss in Elderly Men and Women: The Framingham Osteoporosis Study†

    Marian T. Hannan;Marian T. Hannan;Katherine L. Tucker;Bess Dawson-Hughes;L. Adrienne Cupples

  • Sequencing of 53,831 diverse genomes from the NHLBI TOPMed Program

    Daniel Taliun;Daniel N. Harris;Michael D. Kessler;Jedidiah Carlson;Jedidiah Carlson

Frequent Co-Authors

David Karasik
David Karasik Bar-Ilan University
Marian T. Hannan
Marian T. Hannan Harvard University
L. Adrienne Cupples
L. Adrienne Cupples Boston University
Yi-Hsiang Hsu
Yi-Hsiang Hsu Harvard University
Fernando Rivadeneira
Fernando Rivadeneira Erasmus University Rotterdam
André G. Uitterlinden
André G. Uitterlinden Erasmus University Rotterdam
Joanne M. Murabito
Joanne M. Murabito Boston University
Tamara B. Harris
Tamara B. Harris National Institutes of Health
Mary L. Bouxsein
Mary L. Bouxsein Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Claes Ohlsson
Claes Ohlsson University of Gothenburg

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 alternatives or complementary career paths to studying medicine in the USA can open a range of rewarding opportunities. Online degree programs make it more convenient to pursue diverse careers in healthcare, helping students balance their education with other commitments.

For registered nurses aiming for leadership roles, an easiest dnp program online may be an excellent option to advance clinical expertise efficiently. If you are just starting out, consider enrolling in an lpn accelerated program, which offers a fast track to becoming a Licensed Practical Nurse and entering the healthcare workforce sooner.

For those interested in mental health, the fastest psychiatric nurse practitioner program can help you rapidly specialize and meet the rising demand for psychiatric care. Alternatively, if you're drawn to the business side of medicine, a health administration degree online can prepare you for management roles in hospitals, clinics, or public health agencies.

Exploring these online options can help you find the right fit for your career goals in the ever-evolving healthcare landscape.

Best Scientists Citing Douglas P. Kiel

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles