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 95 9839 9231 5058 4673 452 67121

Eric R. Bates publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Eric R. Bates between 1981 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Eric R. Bates published across 45 years, from 1981 to 2025, averaging 10.5 papers a year. Output peaked at 28 publications in 2008. 12 of the 471 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20 25
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1981 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 28. Peak 28 publications in 2008. 1981: 1 publication 1982: 0 publications 1983: 1 publication 1984: 5 publications 1985: 6 publications 1986: 7 publications 1987: 7 publications 1988: 9 publications 1989: 5 publications 1990: 2 publications 1991: 10 publications 1992: 6 publications 1993: 6 publications 1994: 12 publications 1995: 10 publications 1996: 4 publications 1997: 11 publications 1998: 15 publications 1999: 9 publications 2000: 11 publications 2001: 10 publications 2002: 10 publications 2003: 15 publications 2004: 12 publications 2005: 11 publications 2006: 10 publications 2007: 20 publications 2008: 28 publications 2009: 15 publications 2010: 23 publications 2011: 14 publications 2012: 16 publications 2013: 15 publications 2014: 16 publications 2015: 18 publications 2016: 18 publications 2017: 14 publications 2018: 10 publications 2019: 13 publications 2020: 17 publications 2021: 5 publications 2022: 4 publications 2023: 8 publications 2024: 5 publications 2025: 7 publications
1981 2025

471 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Eric R. Bates: publications per year, 1981 to 2025
Year Publications
1981 1
1982 0
1983 1
1984 5
1985 6
1986 7
1987 7
1988 9
1989 5
1990 2
1991 10
1992 6
1993 6
1994 12
1995 10
1996 4
1997 11
1998 15
1999 9
2000 11
2001 10
2002 10
2003 15
2004 12
2005 11
2006 10
2007 20
2008 28
2009 15
2010 23
2011 14
2012 16
2013 15
2014 16
2015 18
2016 18
2017 14
2018 10
2019 13
2020 17
2021 5
2022 4
2023 8
2024 5
2025 7
Total 471
Download as CSV

Eric R. Bates 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 R. Bates 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, 441–460 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: 452 publications — 49th percentile

49% 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
441–460 771 452
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 R. Bates 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 R. Bates 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, 94–95 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: 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.

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 95
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

Eric R. Bates is affiliated with the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor in the United States. Their body of research primarily focuses on medicine, with a particular emphasis on cardiology and cardiovascular medicine.

The main subfields in which they have published include cardiology and cardiovascular medicine, surgery, radiology, nuclear medicine and imaging, pulmonary and respiratory medicine, and epidemiology.

The key topics covered in their research encompass cardiac imaging and diagnostics, coronary interventions and diagnostics, acute myocardial infarction research, antiplatelet therapy and cardiovascular diseases, cardiac, anesthesia and surgical outcomes, COVID-19 and healthcare impacts, and coronary artery anomalies.

Eric R. Bates has authored numerous publications, including the following recent papers:

  • 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization (2021), Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: Executive Summary (2021), Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Management of Adults With Anomalous Aortic Origin of the Coronary Arteries (2023), Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Dual Antiplatelet Therapy: A Concise Review for Clinicians (2023), Life
  • Outcomes According to Coronary Revascularization Modality in the ISCHEMIA Trial (2023), Journal of the American College of Cardiology

The frequent co-authors collaborating with Eric R. Bates include Eloisa Arbustini, Jeffrey Schussler, Robert Stoler, Antonio Abbate, and J Dawn.

Publications are frequently found in venues such as The American Journal of Cardiology, JACC Case Reports, Annals of Internal Medicine, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, and the Journal of the American Heart Association.

Best Publications

  • An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction.

    Maarten Simoons;Eric Topol;Robert Califf;Frans van de Werf

  • Optimal Medical Therapy with or without PCI for Stable Coronary Disease

    William E. Boden;Koon K. Teo;Pamela M. Hartigan;David J. Maron

  • American College of Cardiology Clinical Expert Consensus Document on Standards for Acquisition, Measurement and Reporting of Intravascular Ultrasound Studies (IVUS). A report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents.

    Gary S Mintz;Steven E Nissen;William D Anderson;Steven R Bailey

  • American College of Cardiology/European Society of Cardiology clinical expert consensus document on hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents and the European Society of Cardiology Committee for Practice Guidelines

    Barry J. Maron;William J. McKenna;Gordon K. Danielson;Lukas J. Kappenberger

  • 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

    Glenn N. Levine;Eric R. Bates;James C. Blankenship;Steven R. Bailey

  • 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

  • 2007 focused update of the ACC/AHA 2004 guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines.

    Elliott M. Antman;Mary Hand;Paul W. Armstrong;Eric R. Bates

  • Optimal Medical Therapy With or Without Percutaneous Coronary Intervention to Reduce Ischemic Burden Results From the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) Trial Nuclear Substudy

    Leslee J. Shaw;Daniel S. Berman;David J. Maron;G. B. John Mancini

  • 2016 ACC/AHA Guideline Focused Update on Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines

    Glenn N. Levine;Eric R. Bates;John A. Bittl;Ralph G. Brindis

  • ACCF/AHA 2007 Clinical Expert Consensus Document on Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring By Computed Tomography in Global Cardiovascular Risk Assessment and in Evaluation of Patients With Chest Pain. A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Clinical Expert Consensus Task Force (ACCF/AHA Writing Committee to Update the 2000 Expert Consensus Document on Electron Beam Computed Tomography)

    Philip Greenland;Robert O. Bonow;Bruce H. Brundage;Matthew J. Budoff

  • ACCF/AHA 2007 Clinical Expert Consensus Document on Coronary Artery Calcium Scoring By Computed Tomography in Global Cardiovascular Risk Assessment and in Evaluation of Patients With Chest Pain

    Philip Greenland;Robert O. Bonow;Bruce H. Brundage;Matthew J. Budoff

  • Circumferential pulmonary-vein ablation for chronic atrial fibrillation.

    Hakan Oral;Carlo Pappone;Aman Chugh;Eric Good

  • Atorvastatin Reduces the Ability of Clopidogrel to Inhibit Platelet Aggregation A New Drug–Drug Interaction

    Wei C. Lau;Lucy A. Waskell;Paul B. Watkins;Charlene J. Neer

  • ACCF/ACR/AHA/NASCI/SCMR 2010 Expert Consensus Document on Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Expert Consensus Documents

    W. Gregory Hundley;David A. Bluemke;J. Paul Finn;Scott D. Flamm

  • Pharmacodynamic effect and clinical efficacy of clopidogrel and prasugrel with or without a proton-pump inhibitor: an analysis of two randomised trials

    Michelle L O'Donoghue;Eugene Braunwald;Elliott M Antman;Sabina A Murphy

  • Reperfusion therapy for acute myocardial infarction with fibrinolytic therapy or combination reduced fibrinolytic therapy and platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition: the GUSTO V randomised trial.

    EJ Topol;AM Lincoff;RM Califf;EM Ohman

  • ACCF/ACG/AHA 2008 Expert Consensus Document on Reducing the Gastrointestinal Risks of Antiplatelet Therapy and NSAID Use: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Task Force on Clinical Expert Consensus Documents

    Deepak L. Bhatt;James Scheiman;Neena S. Abraham;Elliott M. Antman

  • 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Executive Summary A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions

    Glenn N. Levine;Eric R. Bates;James C. Blankenship;Steven R. Bailey

  • Hospital Delays in Reperfusion for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Implications When Selecting a Reperfusion Strategy

    Duane S. Pinto;Ajay J. Kirtane;Brahmajee K. Nallamothu;Sabina A. Murphy

  • Times to Treatment in Transfer Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States National Registry of Myocardial Infarction (NRMI)-3/4 Analysis

    Brahmajee K. Nallamothu;Eric R. Bates;Jeph Herrin;Yongfei Wang

Frequent Co-Authors

Brahmajee K. Nallamothu
Brahmajee K. Nallamothu University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Christopher B. Granger
Christopher B. Granger Duke University
Eric J. Topol
Eric J. Topol Scripps Research Institute
Mark A. Hlatky
Mark A. Hlatky Stanford University
William S. Weintraub
William S. Weintraub Georgetown University
Deepak L. Bhatt
Deepak L. Bhatt Mount Sinai Hospital
Debabrata Mukherjee
Debabrata Mukherjee Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center
Bernard R. Chaitman
Bernard R. Chaitman Saint Louis University
Alice K. Jacobs
Alice K. Jacobs Boston University
Judith S. Hochman
Judith S. Hochman New York University

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

Considering a career in Medicine doesn’t always mean spending years on a traditional campus. Today, there are many online degrees and training programs that can fast-track your entry into healthcare roles or help you specialize further.

For those eager to start caring for patients quickly, fast track lpn programs online offer an accelerated path to becoming a Licensed Practical Nurse, often in under a year. Nurses aiming for advanced practice can explore bsn to np programs online, which allow registered nurses to gain specialized skills and certification without on-campus commitments.

On the administrative side, healthcare management is a fast-growing field. Those interested in leadership roles should look for the cheapest mha programs online to earn a Healthcare Administration degree cost-effectively. There are also plenty of options for an affordable mha online so you can boost your credentials without high tuition fees.

Each of these online pathways offers flexibility and accessibility, letting you move towards a healthcare career or advancement on your own schedule.

Best Scientists Citing Eric R. Bates

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles