World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Friedrich W. Mohr

Friedrich W. Mohr

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
121
Citations
64768
World Ranking
3564
National Ranking
189

Friedrich W. Mohr 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 W. Mohr 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: 1,436 publications — 99th percentile

99% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Friedrich W. Mohr 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 W. Mohr 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: 121 D-Index — 83rd percentile

83% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Friedrich W. Mohr is affiliated with Leipzig University in Germany and conducts research primarily in the field of Medicine, with a focus on Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Surgery, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, and Epidemiology.

Their research topics cover a range of areas including Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics, Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics, Acute Myocardial Infarction Research, Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes, Antiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases, Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments, and Cardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques.

Mohr has published extensively in peer-reviewed journals, with frequent contributions to the following venues:

  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Clinical Research in Cardiology
  • European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery
  • European Heart Journal
  • Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Recent notable publications include:

  • Impact of Peri-Procedural Myocardial Infarction on Outcomes After Revascularization (2020), Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • 10-Year Follow-Up After Revascularization in Elderly Patients With Complex Coronary Artery Disease (2021), Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Sex Differences in All-Cause Mortality in the Decade Following Complex Coronary Revascularization (2020), Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Myocardial Revascularization Surgery (2021), Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Single or multiple arterial bypass graft surgery vs. percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease (2021), European Heart Journal

Friedrich W. Mohr has collaborated frequently with a number of co-authors, including Patrick W. Serruys, David R. Holmes, Yoshinobu Onuma, Michael J. Mack, and Piroze Davierwala. These collaborations reflect a network of multidisciplinary expertise in cardiology and cardiovascular surgery.

Best Publications

  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Severe Coronary Artery Disease

    Patrick W. Serruys;Marie-Claude Morice;A. Pieter Kappetein;Antonio Colombo

  • Percutaneous aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis in high-risk patients using the second- and current third-generation self-expanding CoreValve prosthesis: device success and 30-day clinical outcome.

    Eberhard Grube;Gerhard Schuler;Lutz Buellesfeld;Ulrich Gerckens

  • Regular Physical Activity Improves Endothelial Function in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease by Increasing Phosphorylation of Endothelial Nitric Oxide Synthase

    R. Hambrecht;V. Adams;S. Erbs;A. Linke

  • Anatomical and clinical characteristics to guide decision making between coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention for individual patients: development and validation of SYNTAX score II

    Vasim Farooq;David Van Klaveren;Ewout W. Steyerberg;Emanuele Meliga

  • Outcomes in Patients With De Novo Left Main Disease Treated With Either Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents or Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Treatment in the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) Trial

    Marie Claude Morice;Patrick W. Serruys;A. Pieter Kappetein;Ted E. Feldman

  • Stroke after cardiac surgery: a risk factor analysis of 16,184 consecutive adult patients.

    Jan Bucerius;Jan F Gummert;Michael A Borger;Thomas Walther

  • Early and late outcomes of 517 consecutive adult patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for refractory postcardiotomy cardiogenic shock

    Ardawan Julian Rastan;Andreas Dege;Matthias Mohr;Nicolas Doll

  • Assessment of the SYNTAX score in the Syntax study

    Patrick W. Serruys;Yoshinobu Onuma;Scot Garg;Giovanna Sarno

  • Transapical Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Implantation Multicenter Experience

    Thomas Walther;Paul Simon;Todd Dewey;Gerhard Wimmer-Greinecker

  • Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with drug-eluting stenting for the treatment of left main and/or three-vessel disease: 3-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial

    Arie Pieter Kappetein;Ted E. Feldman;Michael J. MacK;Marie Claude Morice

  • Mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting for coronary artery disease: a pooled analysis of individual patient data

    Stuart J. Head;Milan Milojevic;Joost Daemen;Jung Min Ahn

  • Minimally Invasive Port-Access Mitral Valve Surgery

    F.W. Mohr;V. Falk;A. Diegeler;T. Walther

  • Five-Year Outcomes in Patients With Left Main Disease Treated With Either Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery Trial

    Marie Claude Morice;Patrick W. Serruys;A. Pieter Kappetein;Ted E. Feldman

  • Neuromonitoring and neurocognitive outcome in off-pump versus conventional coronary bypass operation

    Anno Diegeler;Robert Hirsch;Felix Schneider;Lars-Oliver Schilling

  • Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial.

    Daniel J F M Thuijs;A Pieter Kappetein;Patrick W Serruys;Friedrich-Wilhelm Mohr

  • Randomized Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Unprotected Left Main Stem Stenosis

    Enno Boudriot;Holger Thiele;Thomas Walther;Christoph Liebetrau

  • Computer-enhanced "robotic" cardiac surgery: experience in 148 patients

    Friedrich W. Mohr;Volkmar Falk;Anno Diegeler;Thomas Walther

  • Clinical and Economic Impact of Diabetes Mellitus on Percutaneous and Surgical Treatment of Multivessel Coronary Disease Patients Insights From the Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study (ARTS) Trial

    Alexandre Abizaid;Marco A. Costa;Marinella Centemero;Andrea S. Abizaid

  • Treatment of complex coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes: 5-year results comparing outcomes of bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention in the SYNTAX trial

    Arie Pieter Kappetein;Stuart J. Head;Marie-Claude Morice;Adrian P. Banning

  • Transcatheter Valve Implantation for Patients with Aortic Stenosis

    Grégory Ducrocq;Dominique Himbert;Eric Brochet;Alec Vahanian

Frequent Co-Authors

Michael A. Borger
Michael A. Borger Leipzig University
Volkmar Falk
Volkmar Falk Charité - University Medicine Berlin
Thomas Walther
Thomas Walther University College Cork
Patrick W. Serruys
Patrick W. Serruys University of Galway
Gerhard Schuler
Gerhard Schuler Leipzig University
Jan F. Gummert
Jan F. Gummert Heart and Diabetes Center North Rhine-Westphalia
Axel Linke
Axel Linke TU Dresden
David R. Holmes
David R. Holmes Mayo Clinic
Keith D. Dawkins
Keith D. Dawkins Boston Scientific (United States)
Antonio Colombo
Antonio Colombo Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS

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

Exploring a medical career in the USA opens the door to a diverse set of related fields—all with strong demand and flexible online degree options.

One popular direction is to pursue a degree in healthcare administration. This path is ideal if you're interested in working on the management side of hospitals and health systems, ensuring daily operations run smoothly.

For registered nurses aspiring to become nurse practitioners, an asn to np bridge program offers a streamlined route to advanced clinical roles, blending flexibility with career advancement.

Those passionate about diet and wellbeing can consider earning an online nutritionist degree. This degree prepares graduates for roles in clinical nutrition, health education, and wellness coaching.

If you’re a working adult aiming for a senior leadership position, choosing whats the best online mha program for working adults can lead to new opportunities in health administration without interrupting your current job.

Exploring these online degree pathways can help you align your education with a rewarding medical or healthcare career.

Best Scientists Citing Friedrich W. Mohr

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles