World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Elspeth M. McDougall

Elspeth M. McDougall

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
80
Citations
19707
World Ranking
17276
National Ranking
724

Elspeth M. McDougall 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 Elspeth M. McDougall 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: 346 publications — 27th percentile

27% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Elspeth M. McDougall 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 Elspeth M. McDougall 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: 80 D-Index — 16th percentile

16% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Elspeth M. McDougall is affiliated with the University of British Columbia in Canada. Their research primarily focuses on fields related to Medicine, with particular attention to Surgery, Physiology, and Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health.

The scientist's work emphasizes several topics within medical education and training, including:

  • Surgical Simulation and Training
  • Simulation-Based Education in Healthcare
  • Innovations in Medical Education

One notable recent publication by Elspeth M. McDougall is "A continued need for simulation facilities, technologies, and resources in Canadian urology training," published in 2020 in the Canadian Urological Association Journal.

Their research has been published in the following venue:

  • Canadian Urological Association Journal

There are no frequent co-authors listed for Elspeth M. McDougall's publications. The available data do not indicate any book publications or awards received.

Best Publications

  • LAPAROSCOPIC VERSUS OPEN RADICAL NEPHRECTOMY: A 9-YEAR EXPERIENCE

    Matthew D. Dunn;Andrew J. Portis;Arieh L. Shalhav;Abdelhamid M. Elbahnasy

  • Prospective, randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for lower pole caliceal calculi 1 cm or less.

    Margaret S. Pearle;James E. Lingeman;Raymond Leveillee;Ramsay Kuo

  • Validation of surgical simulators.

    Elspeth M. McDougall

  • A consensus document on robotic surgery

    D. M. Herron;M. Marohn;Advincula A. Advincula;S. Aggarwal

  • Complications of Laparoscopic Nephrectomy in 185 Patients: A Multi-Institutional Review

    Inderbir S. Gill;Louis R. Kavoussi;Ralph V. Clayman;Richard Ehrlich

  • LOWER CALICEAL STONE CLEARANCE AFTER SHOCK WAVE LITHOTRIPSY OR URETEROSCOPY: THE IMPACT OF LOWER POLE RADIOGRAPHIC ANATOMY

    Abdelhamid M. Elbahnasy;Arieh L. Shalhav;David M. Hoenig;Osama M. Elashry

  • LONG-TERM FOLLOWUP AFTER LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL NEPHRECTOMY

    Andrew J. Portis;Yan Yan;Jaime Landman;Cathy Chen

  • Laparoscopic nephrectomy for renal cell cancer: evaluation of efficacy and safety: a multicenter experience

    Jeffrey A Cadeddu;Yoshinari Ono;Ralph V Clayman;Peter H Barrett

  • Laparoscopic Radical Nephrectomy for Renal Tumor: The Washington University Experience

    Elspeth M. McDougall;Ralph V. Clayman;Osama M. Elashry

  • Prospective randomized trial comparing shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy for management of distal ureteral calculi

    Margaret Pearle;Robert Nadler;Eduardo Bercowsky;Cathy Chen

  • The effect of prolonged pneumoperitoneum on renal function in an animal model

    McDougall Em;Monk Tg;Wolf Js;Hicks M

  • Laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper tract transitional cell cancer: the Washington University experience.

    Elspeth M. McDougall;Ralph V. Clayman;Osama Elashry

  • Laparoscopic nephrectomy in patients with end-stage renal disease and autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease

    Matthew D. Dunn;Andrew J. Portis;Abdelhamid M. Elbahnasy;Arieh L. Shalhav

  • Retroperitoneal and pelvic extraperitoneal laparoscopy: an international perspective

    Inderbir S Gill;Ralph V Clayman;David M Albala;Yoshio Aso

  • FLEXIBLE URETEROSCOPES: A SINGLE CENTER EVALUATION OF THE DURABILITY AND FUNCTION OF THE NEW ENDOSCOPES SMALLER THAN 9Fr

    Jose S. Afane;Ephrem O. Olweny;Eduardo Bercowsky;Chandru P. Sundaram

  • Endopyelotomy and endoureterotomy with the acucise ureteral cutting balloon device: preliminary experience.

    P. S. Chandhoke;R. V. Clayman;A. M. Stone;E. M. Mcdougall

  • Transperitoneal nephrectomy for benign disease of the kidney: A comparison of laparoscopic and open surgical techniques

    Kurt Kerbl;Brad S. Wilson;Ralph V. Clayman;Paramjit S. Chandhoke

  • Rapid communication: transvaginal single-port NOTES nephrectomy: initial laboratory experience.

    Ralph V. Clayman;Geoffrey N. Box;Jose Benito A Abraham;Hak J. Lee

  • Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy in the Pig Model

    E. M. McDougall;R. V. Clayman;P. S. Chandhoke;K. Kerbl

  • Construct Validity Testing of a Laparoscopic Surgical Simulator

    Elspeth M. McDougall;Federico A. Corica;John R. Boker;Leandro G. Sala

Frequent Co-Authors

Ralph V. Clayman
Ralph V. Clayman University of California, Irvine
Louis R. Kavoussi
Louis R. Kavoussi Northwell Health
Peter A. Humphrey
Peter A. Humphrey Yale University
Kathryn Osann
Kathryn Osann University of California, Irvine
J. Stuart Wolf
J. Stuart Wolf The University of Texas at Austin
Inderbir S. Gill
Inderbir S. Gill University of Southern California
Jihad H. Kaouk
Jihad H. Kaouk Cleveland Clinic
Jeffrey A. Cadeddu
Jeffrey A. Cadeddu The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
Glenn M. Preminger
Glenn M. Preminger Duke University
William D. Middleton
William D. Middleton Washington University in St. Louis

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 career in medicine isn’t limited to becoming a physician; many rewarding pathways are now available online for students and professionals seeking flexibility and affordability. Healthcare roles such as nurse practitioners, healthcare administrators, and advanced practice nurses are in high demand across the United States.

For those interested in mental health, online pmhnp programs can prepare students to become psychiatric mental health nurse practitioners, helping to address the nation’s growing mental health needs.

If you’re seeking to step into healthcare management, consider enrolling in the cheapest online healthcare administration degree programs. These options provide a solid foundation in health systems, policy, and leadership. Those wishing to further specialize can explore the cheapest mha online programs to earn a master’s in healthcare administration with budget-friendly tuition rates.

For nurses aiming for advanced clinical practice or leadership roles, there are dnp online programs cheap that offer flexible, high-level doctoral training at accessible costs.

These online degrees open doors to diverse healthcare careers, offering flexibility, competitive tuition, and strong job outlooks for compassionate professionals.

Best Scientists Citing Elspeth M. McDougall

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles