World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Eric M. Isselbacher

Eric M. Isselbacher

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 91 11563 10872 5934 5490 346 42437

Eric M. Isselbacher publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Eric M. Isselbacher between 1985 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Eric M. Isselbacher published across 42 years, from 1985 to 2026, averaging 9 papers a year. Output peaked at 27 publications in 2013. 12 of the 377 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20 25
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1985 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 27. Peak 27 publications in 2013. 1985: 1 publication 1986: 1 publication 1987: 0 publications 1988: 0 publications 1989: 0 publications 1990: 0 publications 1991: 0 publications 1992: 4 publications 1993: 2 publications 1994: 1 publication 1995: 2 publications 1996: 3 publications 1997: 0 publications 1998: 3 publications 1999: 0 publications 2000: 4 publications 2001: 4 publications 2002: 9 publications 2003: 6 publications 2004: 11 publications 2005: 13 publications 2006: 7 publications 2007: 16 publications 2008: 3 publications 2009: 6 publications 2010: 11 publications 2011: 13 publications 2012: 21 publications 2013: 27 publications 2014: 26 publications 2015: 19 publications 2016: 25 publications 2017: 21 publications 2018: 24 publications 2019: 15 publications 2020: 15 publications 2021: 14 publications 2022: 11 publications 2023: 15 publications 2024: 12 publications 2025: 11 publications 2026: 1 publication
1985 2026

377 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Eric M. Isselbacher: publications per year, 1985 to 2026
Year Publications
1985 1
1986 1
1987 0
1988 0
1989 0
1990 0
1991 0
1992 4
1993 2
1994 1
1995 2
1996 3
1997 0
1998 3
1999 0
2000 4
2001 4
2002 9
2003 6
2004 11
2005 13
2006 7
2007 16
2008 3
2009 6
2010 11
2011 13
2012 21
2013 27
2014 26
2015 19
2016 25
2017 21
2018 24
2019 15
2020 15
2021 14
2022 11
2023 15
2024 12
2025 11
2026 1
Total 377
Download as CSV

Eric M. Isselbacher publications per year - data summary

  • Eric M. Isselbacher, a Medicine scholar from Harvard University, has 377 publications recorded across 42 years, from 1985 to 2026.
  • The oldest publication on record dates to 1985 and the most recent to 2026.
  • The most productive year is 2013, with 27 publications.
  • The least productive years with any output are 1985, 1986, 1994 and 2026, with 1 publication each.
  • 7 of the 42 years in the span carry no publications at all (1987, 1988, 1989, 1990 and others).
  • The rate of publication averages 9.0 papers per year over the whole span, or 10.8 per year counting only the 35 years with at least one publication.
  • The last 5 years on the chart (2022-2026) hold 50 publications, 13% of the career total.
  • Split into equal eras - 1985-1998: 17 publications (1.2 per year); 1999-2012: 124 publications (8.9 per year); 2013-2026: 236 publications (16.9 per year).
  • Comparing the opening and closing eras, the overall trend of publication is rising.

Eric M. Isselbacher 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 Eric M. Isselbacher 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: 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.

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
341–360 922 346
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

Eric M. Isselbacher publication distribution in Medicine in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the publication count of all 20,134 Medicine scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 86 ranges running from 101–120 to 1,796+ publications.
  • Eric M. Isselbacher, a Medicine scholar from Harvard University, records 346 publications - the 27th percentile of the discipline.
  • 27% of ranked Medicine scientists score the same or lower than Eric M. Isselbacher, and about 73% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 441–460 publications range, and Eric M. Isselbacher ranks below the median.
  • The most crowded range is 341–360 publications, holding 922 scientists (5% of the field).
  • 64% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 521–540 publications), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more, 100 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

Eric M. Isselbacher 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 Eric M. Isselbacher 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, 90–91 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: 91 D-Index — 43rd percentile

43% 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 91
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
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

Eric M. Isselbacher D-index placement in Medicine in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the discipline H-index (D-index) of all 20,134 Medicine scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 75 ranges running from 70–71 to 217+ D-Index.
  • Eric M. Isselbacher, a Medicine scholar from Harvard University, records 91 D-Index - the 43rd percentile of the discipline.
  • 43% of ranked Medicine scientists score the same or lower than Eric M. Isselbacher, and about 57% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 94–95 D-Index range, and Eric M. Isselbacher ranks below the median.
  • The most crowded range is 82–83 D-Index, holding 1,027 scientists (5% of the field).
  • 70% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 106–107 D-Index), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more, 98 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

Overview

Eric M. Isselbacher is affiliated with Harvard University in the United States and has a prolific publication record primarily in the field of Medicine with a focus on pulmonary, cardiovascular, and surgical studies.

Their research covers multiple subfields, including:

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Epidemiology

Key topics addressed in their work include:

  • Aortic Disease and Treatment Approaches
  • Aortic aneurysm repair treatments
  • Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
  • Cardiac Structural Anomalies and Repair
  • Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
  • Cardiovascular Issues in Pregnancy

Eric M. Isselbacher has been involved in notable publications such as:

  • 2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines (2022, Circulation)
  • 2022 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Aortic Disease (2022, Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
  • Wearable Devices for Ambulatory Cardiac Monitoring (2020, Journal of the American College of Cardiology)
  • Early Mortality in Type A Acute Aortic Dissection (2022, JAMA Cardiology)
  • State-of-the-Art Machine Learning Techniques Aiming to Improve Patient Outcomes Pertaining to the Cardiovascular System (2020, Journal of the American Heart Association)

The scientist frequently publishes in several distinguished venues, including:

  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Circulation
  • JACC Case Reports
  • Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
  • JAMA Cardiology

Collaborations form an important part of their scholarly activity. Frequent co-authors include:

  • Kim A. Eagle
  • Derek R. Brinster
  • Alan C. Braverman
  • Kevin M. Harris
  • Antonis A. Armoundas

Best Publications

  • The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD): new insights into an old disease.

    Peter G. Hagan;Christoph A. Nienaber;Eric M. Isselbacher;David Bruckman

  • 2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM guidelines for the diagnosis and management of patients with thoracic aortic disease: Executive summary: A report of the american college of cardiology foundation/american heart association task force on practice guidelines, american association for thoracic surgery, american college of radiology, american stroke association

    Loren F. Hiratzka;George L. Bakris;Joshua A. Beckman;Robert M. Bersin

  • 2010 ACCF/AHA/AATS/ACR/ASA/SCA/SCAI/SIR/STS/SVM Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Thoracic Aortic Disease

    Loren F. Hiratzka;George L. Bakris;Joshua A. Beckman;Robert M. Bersin

  • Thoracic and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

    Eric M. Isselbacher

  • Presentation, Diagnosis, and Outcomes of Acute Aortic Dissection: 17-Year Trends From the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection

    Linda A. Pape;Mazen Awais;Elise M. Woznicki;Toru Suzuki

  • Insights From the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection: A 20-Year Experience of Collaborative Clinical Research.

    Arturo Evangelista;Eric M. Isselbacher;Eduardo Bossone;Thomas G. Gleason

  • Long-Term Survival in Patients Presenting With Type B Acute Aortic Dissection Insights From the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection

    Thomas T. Tsai;Rossella Fattori;Santi Trimarchi;Eric Isselbacher

  • Aortic Diameter ≥5.5 cm Is Not a Good Predictor of Type A Aortic Dissection Observations From the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD)

    Linda A. Pape;Thomas T. Tsai;Eric M. Isselbacher;Jae K. Oh

  • Clinical profiles and outcomes of acute type B aortic dissection in the current era: Lessons from the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD)

    Toru Suzuki;Rajendra H. Mehta;Hüseyin Ince;Ryozo Nagai

  • Partial thrombosis of the false lumen in patients with acute type B aortic dissection.

    Thomas T Tsai;Arturo Evangelista;Christoph A Nienaber;Truls Myrmel

  • Contemporary results of surgery in acute type A aortic dissection: The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection experience.

    Santi Trimarchi;Christoph A. Nienaber;Vincenzo Rampoldi;Truls Myrmel

  • Multimodality imaging of diseases of the thoracic aorta in adults: From the American society of echocardiography and the european association of cardiovascular imaging: Endorsed by the society of cardiovascular computed tomography and society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance

    Steven A. Goldstein;Arturo Evangelista;Suhny Abbara;Andrew Arai

  • Cocaine-Related Aortic Dissection in Perspective

    Kim A. Eagle;Eric M. Isselbacher;Roman W. DeSanctis

  • Characterizing the young patient with aortic dissection: Results from the International Registry of Aortic Dissection (IRAD)

    James L Januzzi;Eric M Isselbacher;Rossella Fattori;Jeanna V Cooper

  • Gender-Related Differences in Acute Aortic Dissection

    Christoph A. Nienaber;Rossella Fattori;Rajendra H. Mehta;Barbara M. Richartz

  • Diagnostic imaging in the evaluation of suspected aortic dissection. Old standards and new directions.

    Joaquin E. Cigarroa;Eric M. Isselbacher;Roman W. Desanctis;Kim A. Eagle

  • Acute Intramural Hematoma of the Aorta A Mystery in Evolution

    Arturo Evangelista;Debabrata Mukherjee;Debabrata Mukherjee;Rajendra H. Mehta;Patrick T. O’Gara

  • Atherosclerotic Vascular Disease Conference Writing Group III: Pathophysiology

    David P. Faxon;Valentin Fuster;Peter Libby;Joshua A. Beckman

  • Complicated acute type B dissection: is surgery still the best option?: a report from the International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection.

    Rossella Fattori;Thomas T. Tsai;Truls Myrmel;Arturo Evangelista

  • Contemporary Results of Surgery in Acute Type A Aortic Dissection: The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection Experience

    S. Trimarchi;C.A. Nienaber;V. Rampoldi

Frequent Co-Authors

Kim A. Eagle
Kim A. Eagle University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Christoph A. Nienaber
Christoph A. Nienaber National Institutes of Health
Eduardo Bossone
Eduardo Bossone University of Naples Federico II
Arturo Evangelista
Arturo Evangelista Autonomous University of Barcelona
Patrick T. O'Gara
Patrick T. O'Gara Brigham and Women's Hospital
Reed E. Pyeritz
Reed E. Pyeritz University of Pennsylvania
Thoralf M. Sundt
Thoralf M. Sundt Harvard University
James L. Januzzi
James L. Januzzi Harvard University
Udo Sechtem
Udo Sechtem Robert Bosch (Germany)
Gilbert R. Upchurch
Gilbert R. Upchurch University of Florida

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 can take many forms beyond the traditional MD route. One popular alternative is nursing, which offers a variety of online options. For those without a nursing background, direct entry msn programs for non nurses online enable fast-tracked entry into advanced nursing roles, even for students with different undergraduate degrees.

Many prospective medical students seek programs that are accessible. Some schools are known to be the easiest nursing schools to get into, featuring flexible admission standards and rolling intakes, making them appealing options to a broad range of applicants.

Careers aren't limited to direct patient care. Medical billing and coding is a high-demand field that can be studied online, with financial assistance for eligible students. Explore the medical billing and coding financial aid options to find a pathway that suits your needs.

Admission requirements for nursing schools also vary. If exam barriers are a concern, there are do you have to take the teas test to get into nursing school programs that waive common entrance exams, providing more accessible routes to a nursing degree.

Best Scientists Citing Eric M. Isselbacher

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles