World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
91
Citations
24234
World Ranking
11929
National Ranking
6119

Farrokh Dehdashti 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 Farrokh Dehdashti 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: 279 publications — 13th percentile

13% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Farrokh Dehdashti 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 Farrokh Dehdashti 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: 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.

Overview

Farrokh Dehdashti is affiliated with Washington University in St. Louis, United States. Their research primarily focuses on medical imaging, nuclear medicine, and oncology, contributing extensively to the field of Medicine with over 100 publications.

Their work spans several subfields, including:

  • Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
  • Oncology
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Epidemiology

Key topics of Dehdashti's research encompass:

  • Medical Imaging Techniques and Applications
  • Radiopharmaceutical Chemistry and Applications
  • Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Endometrial and Cervical Cancer Treatments
  • Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
  • Prostate Cancer Treatment and Research
  • Cervical Cancer and HPV Research

Frequently publishing in notable venues, their work appears in:

  • Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
  • European Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • Clinical Cancer Research
  • International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

Farrokh Dehdashti has collaborated regularly with several co-authors, including:

  • Barry A. Siegel
  • Richard L. Wahl
  • Richard Laforest
  • Ashwin Singh Parihar
  • Julie K. Schwarz

Some of their recent publications are:

  • Association of PET-based estradiol-challenge test for breast cancer progesterone receptors with response to endocrine therapy, 2021, Nature Communications
  • CC Chemokine Receptor 2-Targeting Copper Nanoparticles for Positron Emission Tomography-Guided Delivery of Gemcitabine for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma, 2021, ACS Nano
  • Co-clinical FDG-PET radiomic signature in predicting response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer, 2021, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging
  • FIGO 2018 staging criteria for cervical cancer: Impact on stage migration and survival, 2020, Gynecologic Oncology
  • Summary: Appropriate Use Criteria for Estrogen Receptor-Targeted PET Imaging with 16α-18F-Fluoro-17β-Fluoroestradiol, 2023, Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Best Publications

  • Five-year survival after resection of hepatic metastases from colorectal cancer in patients screened by positron emission tomography with F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG-PET).

    Felix G. Fernandez;Jeffrey A. Drebin;David C. Linehan;Farrokh Dehdashti

  • Impact of FDG-PET on radiation therapy volume delineation in non-small-cell lung cancer.

    Jeffrey Bradley;Wade L. Thorstad;Sasa Mutic;Tom R. Miller

  • A novel approach to overcome hypoxic tumor resistance: Cu-ATSM-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

    K.S.Clifford Chao;Walter R Bosch;Sasa Mutic;Jason S Lewis

  • Lymph Node Staging by Positron Emission Tomography in Patients With Carcinoma of the Cervix

    Perry W. Grigsby;Barry A. Siegel;Farrokh Dehdashti

  • Metabolic flare: indicator of hormone responsiveness in advanced breast cancer.

    Joanne E. Mortimer;Farrokh Dehdashti;Barry A. Siegel;Kathryn Trinkaus

  • In vivo assessment of tumor hypoxia in lung cancer with 60Cu-ATSM

    Farrokh Dehdashti;Mark A. Mintun;Jason S. Lewis;Jeffrey Bradley

  • Assessing tumor hypoxia in cervical cancer by positron emission tomography with 60Cu-ATSM: relationship to therapeutic response-a preliminary report.

    Farrokh Dehdashti;Perry W Grigsby;Mark A Mintun;Jason S Lewis

  • FDG PET evaluation of mucinous neoplasms: correlation of FDG uptake with histopathologic features.

    Kevin L. Berger;Siobhan A. Nicholson;Farrokh Dehdashti;Barry A. Siegel

  • Usefulness of FDG-PET scan in the assessment of suspected metastatic or recurrent adenocarcinoma of the colon and rectum

    Mark H. Whiteford;Heather M. Whiteford;Laurence F. Yee;Olagunju A. Ogunbiyi

  • Staging of esophageal cancer with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography

    F L Flanagan;F Dehdashti;B A Siegel;D D Trask

  • Positron Tomographic Assessment of Estrogen Receptors in Breast Cancer: Comparison with FDG-PET and In Vitro Receptor Assays

    Dehdashti F;Mortimer Je;Siegel Ba;Griffeth Lk

  • Risk of malignancy in thyroid incidentalomas identified by fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography.

    M S Cohen;N Arslan;F Dehdashti;G M Doherty

  • The standardized uptake value for F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose is a sensitive predictive biomarker for cervical cancer treatment response and survival.

    Elizabeth A. Kidd;Barry A. Siegel;Farrokh Dehdashti;Perry W. Grigsby

  • 11C-Acetate PET Imaging of Prostate Cancer: Detection of Recurrent Disease at PSA Relapse

    Nobuyuki Oyama;Tom R Miller;Farrokh Dehdashti;Barry A Siegel

  • Lymph node staging by positron emission tomography in cervical cancer: relationship to prognosis.

    Elizabeth A. Kidd;Barry A. Siegel;Farrokh Dehdashti;Janet S. Rader

  • 64Cu-TETA-Octreotide as a PET Imaging Agent for Patients with Neuroendocrine Tumors

    C J Anderson;F Dehdashti;P D Cutler;S W Schwarz

  • Positron emission tomographic assessment of 'metabolic flare' to predict response of metastatic breast cancer to antiestrogen therapy

    Farrokh Dehdashti;Fidelma L. Flanagan;Joanne E. Mortimer;John A. Katzenellenbogen

  • Association of posttherapy positron emission tomography with tumor response and survival in cervical carcinoma.

    Julie K. Schwarz;Barry A. Siegel;Farrokh Dehdashti;Perry W. Grigsby

  • 18F-FDG PET Definition of Gross Tumor Volume for Radiotherapy of Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: Is a Single Standardized Uptake Value Threshold Approach Appropriate?

    Kenneth J. Biehl;Feng Ming Kong;Farrokh Dehdashti;Jian Yue Jin

  • Positron Tomographic Assessment of 16α-[18F] Fluoro-17β-Estradiol Uptake in Metastatic Breast Carcinoma

    Andrea H. McGuire;Farrokh Dehdashti;Barry A. Siegel;Alan P. Lyss

Frequent Co-Authors

Barry A. Siegel
Barry A. Siegel Washington University in St. Louis
Perry W. Grigsby
Perry W. Grigsby Washington University in St. Louis
Michael J. Welch
Michael J. Welch Washington University in St. Louis
David G. Mutch
David G. Mutch Washington University in St. Louis
Jason S. Lewis
Jason S. Lewis Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
John A. Katzenellenbogen
John A. Katzenellenbogen University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
feng gao
feng gao Duke University
Feng Gao
Feng Gao Linköping University
Mark A. Mintun
Mark A. Mintun University of Pennsylvania
Adam S. Kibel
Adam S. Kibel Brigham and Women's Hospital

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

The pathway to a career in medicine isn’t limited to becoming a physician. There is a wide range of related online degree programs and bridge pathways that can help you launch or advance your healthcare career.

If you’re interested in the administrative or technical side of healthcare, accredited medical billing and coding schools with financial aid offer flexible options for entering the workforce quickly. For those looking to move into management, a health care administration degree can lead to rewarding leadership roles.

Nursing remains one of the most popular healthcare professions. Not all schools require standardized tests for entry—learn more, including about do you have to take the teas test to get into nursing school. Additionally, many working nurses can accelerate their careers through adn to fnp bridge programs, which pave the way from an associate degree to becoming a family nurse practitioner.

These alternatives and bridge programs make healthcare careers more accessible, allowing you to pursue specialized roles or leadership positions through online study.

Best Scientists Citing Farrokh Dehdashti

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles