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 101 7907 7432 4114 3805 395 41963

Frederick L. Grover publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Frederick L. Grover between 1969 and 2022, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Frederick L. Grover published across 54 years, from 1969 to 2022, averaging 7.4 papers a year. Output peaked at 17 publications in 2013. 8 of the 397 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1969 to 2022. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 17. Peak 17 publications in 2013. 1969: 1 publication 1970: 0 publications 1971: 2 publications 1972: 0 publications 1973: 4 publications 1974: 9 publications 1975: 7 publications 1976: 5 publications 1977: 7 publications 1978: 6 publications 1979: 6 publications 1980: 4 publications 1981: 4 publications 1982: 5 publications 1983: 8 publications 1984: 4 publications 1985: 3 publications 1986: 5 publications 1987: 1 publication 1988: 4 publications 1989: 2 publications 1990: 3 publications 1991: 5 publications 1992: 3 publications 1993: 6 publications 1994: 16 publications 1995: 16 publications 1996: 11 publications 1997: 10 publications 1998: 12 publications 1999: 9 publications 2000: 11 publications 2001: 12 publications 2002: 14 publications 2003: 15 publications 2004: 10 publications 2005: 10 publications 2006: 7 publications 2007: 10 publications 2008: 9 publications 2009: 3 publications 2010: 7 publications 2011: 12 publications 2012: 11 publications 2013: 17 publications 2014: 15 publications 2015: 15 publications 2016: 4 publications 2017: 8 publications 2018: 8 publications 2019: 7 publications 2020: 6 publications 2021: 2 publications 2022: 6 publications
1969 2022

397 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Frederick L. Grover: publications per year, 1969 to 2022
Year Publications
1969 1
1970 0
1971 2
1972 0
1973 4
1974 9
1975 7
1976 5
1977 7
1978 6
1979 6
1980 4
1981 4
1982 5
1983 8
1984 4
1985 3
1986 5
1987 1
1988 4
1989 2
1990 3
1991 5
1992 3
1993 6
1994 16
1995 16
1996 11
1997 10
1998 12
1999 9
2000 11
2001 12
2002 14
2003 15
2004 10
2005 10
2006 7
2007 10
2008 9
2009 3
2010 7
2011 12
2012 11
2013 17
2014 15
2015 15
2016 4
2017 8
2018 8
2019 7
2020 6
2021 2
2022 6
Total 397
Download as CSV

Frederick L. Grover 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 Frederick L. Grover 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, 381–400 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: 395 publications — 37th percentile

37% 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
381–400 861 395
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

Frederick L. Grover 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 Frederick L. Grover 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, 100–101 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: 101 D-Index — 61st percentile

61% 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
100–101 611 101
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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2011 - Distinguished Fellowship Award, American College of Cardiology (ACC)
  • 1971 - Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)

Overview

Frederick L. Grover is affiliated with the University of Colorado Denver in the United States and focuses on research in the field of Medicine with a strong emphasis on Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine and Surgery. Their work spans topics such as cardiac surgery techniques, surgical outcomes, and health systems evaluations.

Grover's research output includes 25 publications in Medicine, with notable concentration in 15 papers related to Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine and 8 in Surgery. Subfield contributions also extend to Economics and Econometrics, Biomedical Engineering, and Radiology, Nuclear Medicine, and Imaging.

The scientist's main topics of study cover:

  • Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
  • Cardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
  • Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
  • Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
  • Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

Frederick L. Grover has published frequently in the following venues:

  • Vessel Plus
  • The Annals of Thoracic Surgery
  • The American Journal of Cardiology
  • JAMA Surgery
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Recent papers include:

  • Ten-Year Outcomes of Off-Pump vs On-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in the Department of Veterans Affairs, 2022, JAMA Surgery
  • Randomized Trials in Cardiac Surgery, 2020, Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Transit Time Flow Measurement: Graft Patency and Clinical Outcomes, 2020, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery
  • Incidence and Prognostic Impact of Incomplete Revascularization Documented by Coronary Angiography 1 Year After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting, 2020, The American Journal of Cardiology
  • Factors associated with long-term survival in patients with stroke after coronary artery bypass grafting, 2020, Journal of International Medical Research

Among frequent co-authors, Grover has collaborated with:

  • A. Laurie Shroyer (10 collaborations)
  • Jacquelyn A. Quin (5 collaborations)
  • Joseph F. Collins (5 collaborations)
  • Brack Hattler (4 collaborations)
  • G. Hossein Almassi (4 collaborations)

Frederick L. Grover has received the Distinguished Fellowship Award from the American College of Cardiology (ACC) in 2011 and was named a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in 1971.

Best Publications

  • The Department of Veterans Affairs' NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

    S F Khuri;J Daley;W Henderson;K Hur

  • Independent Association between Acute Renal Failure and Mortality following Cardiac Surgery

    Glenn M Chertow;Elliott M Levy;Karl E Hammermeister;Frederick Grover

  • Outcomes 15 years after valve replacement with a mechanical versus a bioprosthetic valve: final report of the Veterans Affairs randomized trial.

    Karl Hammermeister;Gulshan K Sethi;William G Henderson;Frederick L Grover

  • On-Pump versus Off-Pump Coronary-Artery Bypass Surgery

    A. Laurie Shroyer;Frederick L. Grover;Brack Hattler;Joseph F. Collins

  • Preoperative Renal Risk Stratification

    G M Chertow;J M Lazarus;C L Christiansen;E F Cook

  • American College of Cardiology key data elements and definitions for measuring the clinical management and outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes. A report of the American College of Cardiology Task Force on Clinical Data Standards (Acute Coronary Syndromes Writing Committee).

    Christopher P Cannon;Alexander Battler;Ralph G Brindis;Jafna L Cox

  • Atrial Fibrillation After Cardiac Surgery: A Major Morbid Event?

    G. Almassi;Tracey Schowalter;Alfred Nicolosi;Anil Aggarwal

  • A decade of change—risk profiles and outcomes for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting procedures, 1990–1999: a report from the STS National Database Committee and the Duke Clinical Research Institute

    T.Bruce Ferguson;Bradley G Hammill;Eric D Peterson;Elizabeth R DeLong

  • Validation of European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) in North American cardiac surgery

    Samer A.M. Nashef;Francois Roques;Bradley G. Hammill;Eric D. Peterson

  • Development of the new lung allocation system in the United States.

    T. M. Egan;S. Murray;R. T. Bustami;T. H. Shearon

  • Risk adjustment of the postoperative mortality rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care : Results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study

    Daley J;Khuri Sf;Henderson W;Hur K

  • The society of thoracic surgeons: 30-day operative mortality and morbidity risk models

    A.Laurie W Shroyer;Laura P Coombs;Eric D Peterson;Mary C Eiken

  • Comparative Effectiveness of Revascularization Strategies

    William S. Weintraub;Maria V. Grau-Sepulveda;Jocelyn M. Weiss;Sean M. O'Brien

  • 2016 Annual Report of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry.

    Frederick L Grover;Sreekanth Vemulapalli;John D Carroll;Fred H Edwards

  • Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting decreases risk-adjusted mortality and morbidity

    Joseph C Cleveland;A.Laurie W Shroyer;A.Laurie W Shroyer;Anita Y Chen;Eric Peterson

  • Health-Related Quality of Life as a Predictor of Mortality Following Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

    J. S. Rumsfeld;S. Mawhinney;M. Mccarthy;A. L. W. Shroyer

  • Prediction of operative mortality after valve replacement surgery

    Fred H Edwards;Eric D Peterson;Laura P Coombs;Elizabeth R DeLong

  • Impact of Gender on Coronary Bypass Operative Mortality

    Fred H. Edwards;Joseph S. Carey;Frederick L. Grover;Joseph W. Bero

  • Outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the United States.

    Michael J. Mack;J. Matthew Brennan;Ralph Brindis;John Carroll

  • ACCF/SCAI/STS/AATS/AHA/ASNC 2009 Appropriateness Criteria for Coronary Revascularization: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation Appropriateness Criteria Task Force, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Thoracic Surgeons, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, and the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology.

    Manesh R. Patel;Gregory J. Dehmer;John W. Hirshfeld;Peter K. Smith

Frequent Co-Authors

Fred H. Edwards
Fred H. Edwards University of Florida
David M. Shahian
David M. Shahian Harvard University
Sean M. O'Brien
Sean M. O'Brien Duke University
William G. Henderson
William G. Henderson University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus
Eric D. Peterson
Eric D. Peterson The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
John S. Rumsfeld
John S. Rumsfeld University of Colorado Denver
Jeffrey P. Jacobs
Jeffrey P. Jacobs University of Florida
John E. Mayer
John E. Mayer Boston Children's Hospital
Michael J. Mack
Michael J. Mack Scott & White Memorial Hospital
E. Murat Tuzcu
E. Murat Tuzcu Cleveland Clinic

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

For those exploring alternatives or complementary paths to a traditional medical degree in the USA, there are many flexible online programs that open doors to rewarding health careers.

Many nurses consider online DNP programs to advance quickly into high-level clinical or leadership roles while balancing work and study. If you’re looking for a quicker entry point, you might explore what is the fastest way to become an LPN, which can get you working in patient care faster than traditional routes.

Specialization is also possible through accelerated graduate pathways. For example, consider the fastest psychiatric nurse practitioner program if you’re interested in mental health care and want to make an impact quickly.

If you prefer to shape healthcare from behind the scenes, a management degree might be right for you. For a cost-effective route, review the options for a healthcare administration degree cost and see how you can lead in healthcare without a clinical background.

Best Scientists Citing Frederick L. Grover

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles