World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
143
Citations
91310
World Ranking
1488
National Ranking
865

Friedrich K. Port 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 Friedrich K. Port 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: 494 publications — 57th percentile

57% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Friedrich K. Port 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 Friedrich K. Port 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: 143 D-Index — 93rd percentile

93% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Friedrich K. Port is affiliated with the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor in the United States. Their research contributions focus primarily on the field of Medicine, with a significant emphasis on Nephrology. They have produced numerous publications exploring various aspects of kidney disease, dialysis, and related topics.

Their work spans several subfields of study, including:

  • Nephrology
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Hematology
  • Nutrition and Dietetics
  • Economics and Econometrics

Main topics covered in their research include:

  • Dialysis and Renal Disease Management
  • Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
  • Child Nutrition and Water Access
  • Central Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
  • Erythropoietin and Anemia Treatment
  • Iron Metabolism and Disorders
  • Pharmacological Effects and Toxicity Studies

Friedrich K. Port has collaborated frequently with several coauthors in their research endeavors, including:

  • Bruce Robinson (20 coauthored papers)
  • Roberto Pecoits-Filho (15 coauthored papers)
  • Jarcy Zee (12 coauthored papers)
  • Bénédicte Stengel (11 coauthored papers)
  • Élodie Speyer (11 coauthored papers)

Their articles have been published in a range of specialized medical journals. Frequent publication venues include:

  • Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (6 publications)
  • Kidney International Reports (4 publications)
  • Clinical Kidney Journal (3 publications)
  • Kidney International (2 publications)
  • American Journal of Kidney Diseases (2 publications)

Recent notable papers by Friedrich K. Port include:

  • "Adherence to the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes CKD Guideline in Nephrology Practice Across Countries," 2020, Kidney International Reports
  • "Associations of Hemoglobin Levels With Health-Related Quality of Life, Physical Activity, and Clinical Outcomes in Persons With Stage 3-5 Nondialysis CKD," 2020, Journal of Renal Nutrition
  • "Sex differences in chronic kidney disease awareness among US adults, 1999 to 2018," 2020, PLoS ONE
  • "Early Postoperative Basal Insulin Therapy versus Standard of Care for the Prevention of Diabetes Mellitus after Kidney Transplantation: A Multicenter Randomized Trial," 2021, Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
  • "Beta-2 microglobulin and all-cause mortality in the era of high-flux hemodialysis: results from the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study," 2020, Clinical Kidney Journal

Best Publications

  • Comparison of Mortality in All Patients on Dialysis, Patients on Dialysis Awaiting Transplantation, and Recipients of a First Cadaveric Transplant

    Robert A. Wolfe;Valarie B. Ashby;Edgar L. Milford;Akinlolu O. Ojo

  • US Renal Data System 2016 Annual Data Report: Epidemiology of Kidney Disease in the United States

    Rajiv Saran;Bruce Robinson;Kevin C. Abbott;Lawrence Y.C. Agodoa

  • US Renal Data System 2015 Annual Data Report: Epidemiology of Kidney Disease in the United States.

    Rajiv Saran;Yi Li;Bruce Robinson;Kevin C. Abbott

  • Association of serum phosphorus and calcium x phosphate product with mortality risk in chronic hemodialysis patients: A national study

    GA Block;TE Hulbert-Shearon;NW Levin;FK Port

  • US Renal Data System 2014 Annual Data Report: Epidemiology of Kidney Disease in the United States

    Rajiv Saran;Yi Li;Bruce Robinson;John Ayanian

  • Chronic renal failure after transplantation of a nonrenal organ.

    Akinlolu O. Ojo;Philip J. Held;Friedrich K. Port;Robert A. Wolfe

  • Association of elevated serum PO(4), Ca x PO(4) product, and parathyroid hormone with cardiac mortality risk in chronic hemodialysis patients.

    Santhi K. Ganesh;Austin G. Stack;Nathan W. Levin;Tempie Hulbert-Shearon

  • Mortality Risk for Dialysis Patients With Different Levels of Serum Calcium, Phosphorus, and PTH: The Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS)

    Francesca Tentori;Margaret J. Blayney;Justin M. Albert;Brenda W. Gillespie

  • Delayed graft function: risk factors and implications for renal allograft survival.

    Akinlolu O. Ojo;Robert A. Wolfe;Philip J. Held;Friedrich K. Port

  • Health-related quality of life as a predictor of mortality and hospitalization: the Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS).

    Donna L. Mapes;Antonio Alberto Lopes;Sudtida Satayathum;Keith P. Mccullough

  • Survival in Recipients of Marginal Cadaveric Donor Kidneys Compared with Other Recipients and Wait-Listed Transplant Candidates

    Akinlolu O. Ojo;Julie A. Hanson;Herwig-Ulf Meier-Kriesche;Chike N. Okechukwu

  • Comparison of Survival Probabilities for Dialysis Patients vs Cadaveric Renal Transplant Recipients

    Friedrich K. Port;Robert A. Wolfe;Elizabeth A. Mauger;Donald P. Berling

  • Predictors and consequences of altered mineral metabolism: The Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study

    Eric W. Young;Justin M. Albert;Sudtida Satayathum;David A. Goodkin

  • Long-term survival in renal transplant recipients with graft function.

    Akinlolu O. Ojo;Julie A. Hanson;Robert A. Wolfe;Alan B. Leichtman

  • A comprehensive risk quantification score for deceased donor kidneys: the kidney donor risk index.

    Panduranga S. Rao;Douglas E. Schaubel;Mary K. Guidinger;Kenneth A. Andreoni

  • The survival benefit of liver transplantation.

    Robert M. Merion;Douglas E. Schaubel;Dawn M. Dykstra;Richard B. Freeman

  • Association of Comorbid Conditions and Mortality in Hemodialysis Patients in Europe, Japan, and the United States: The Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS)

    David A. Goodkin;Jennifer L. Bragg-Gresham;Karl G. Koenig;Robert A. Wolfe

  • Donor characteristics associated with reduced graft survival: an approach to expanding the pool of kidney donors.

    Friedrich K. Port;Jennifer L. Bragg-Gresham;Robert A. Metzger;Dawn M. Dykstra

  • Re-evaluation of risks associated with hyperphosphatemia and hyperparathyroidism in dialysis patients: Recommendations for a change in management

    Geoffrey A. Block;Friedrich K. Port

  • Effect of waiting time on renal transplant outcome

    Herwig-Ulf Meier-Kriesche;Friedrich K. Port;Akinlolu O. Ojo;Steven M. Rudich

Frequent Co-Authors

Robert A. Wolfe
Robert A. Wolfe University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Ronald L. Pisoni
Ronald L. Pisoni Arbor Research Collaborative for Health
Philip J. Held
Philip J. Held University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Lawrence Y. Agodoa
Lawrence Y. Agodoa National Institutes of Health
Akinlolu O. Ojo
Akinlolu O. Ojo University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Hal Morgenstern
Hal Morgenstern University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Robert M. Merion
Robert M. Merion University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Brenda W. Gillespie
Brenda W. Gillespie University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Shunichi Fukuhara
Shunichi Fukuhara Kyoto University
Nathan W. Levin
Nathan W. Levin Mount Sinai Beth Israel

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

If you’re interested in medicine but looking for flexible or alternative paths, several related online degrees and careers are worth exploring. For those without a nursing background, direct entry msn programs allow you to earn a Master’s in Nursing straight from a non-nursing bachelor’s degree, helping you pivot into advanced nursing roles quickly.

Similarly, online bsn programs for non nurses offer accessible options for students transitioning into nursing, often with flexible schedules designed for working adults. If patient care isn’t your primary interest, you can consider the administrative side of healthcare. Accredited medical billing and coding online schools offer training to start a rewarding career in healthcare operations from home.

Entry barriers are also lowering, with some lpn program without teas test options now available. These can help you start your healthcare journey even without standardized entrance exams. Each path offers unique advantages and can serve as a stepping stone toward more advanced roles in medicine and healthcare.

Best Scientists Citing Friedrich K. Port

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles