World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
106
Citations
84264
World Ranking
6351
National Ranking
3390

Gary M. Clark 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 Gary M. Clark 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: 297 publications — 16th percentile

16% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Gary M. Clark 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 Gary M. Clark 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: 106 D-Index — 69th percentile

69% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Gary M. Clark is affiliated with The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio in the United States. Their research contributions primarily focus on Medicine, including subfields such as Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health, Clinical Psychology, Molecular Biology, Electrical and Electronic Engineering, and Surgery.

The main topics covered in Clark's work include:

  • Psychedelics and Drug Studies
  • Coenzyme Q10 studies and effects
  • Advanced battery technologies research
  • Pharmacological Effects and Toxicity Studies
  • Anesthesia and Pain Management
  • Childhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life

Clark has published in multiple venues, most frequently in:

  • Evidence-Based Practice
  • Journal of Jungian Scholarly Studies

Their recent papers include:

  • Review of The Path of the Serpent, Volume 1: Psychedelics and the Neuropsychology of Gnosis by Hereward Tilton, 2022, Journal of Jungian Scholarly Studies
  • Does coenzyme Q10 enzyme relieve symptoms in patients with heart failure?, 2021, Evidence-Based Practice
  • Which medication is most effective for treatment of PTSD?, 2023, Evidence-Based Practice

Frequent co-authors collaborating with Clark include:

  • Molly Chandler
  • Marco Jose Dela Cruz
  • Christopher Taylor
  • CPT Richard Kolek
  • Chuah-Chih Yang

Best Publications

  • Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene

    Dennis J. Slamon;Gary M. Clark;Steven G. Wong;Wendy J. Levin

  • Erlotinib in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer.

    Frances A. Shepherd;José Rodrigues Pereira;Tudor Ciuleanu;Eng Huat Tan

  • Erlotinib Plus Gemcitabine Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Phase III Trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group

    Malcolm J. Moore;David Goldstein;John Hamm;Arie Figer

  • PROGNOSTIC AND PREDICTIVE FACTORS IN BREAST CANCER BY IMMUNOHISTOCHEMICAL ANALYSIS

    D.C. Allred;Jennet Harvey;M. Berardo;G.M. Clark

  • Estrogen Receptor Status by Immunohistochemistry Is Superior to the Ligand-Binding Assay for Predicting Response to Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy in Breast Cancer

    Jennet M. Harvey;Gary M. Clark;C. Kent Osborne;D. Craig Allred

  • Revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System for Breast Cancer

    S. Eva Singletary;Craig Allred;Pandora Ashley;Lawrence W. Bassett

  • Prognostic factors in breast cancer. College of American Pathologists Consensus Statement 1999.

    Fitzgibbons Pl;Page Dl;Weaver D;Thor Ad

  • Determinants of Tumor Response and Survival With Erlotinib in Patients With Non—Small-Cell Lung Cancer

    Román Pérez-Soler;Abraham Chachoua;Lisa A. Hammond;Eric K. Rowinsky

  • Prognostic Factors in Breast Cancer

    Patrick L. Fitzgibbons;Patrick L. Fitzgibbons;David L. Page;Donald Weaver;Ann D. Thor

  • Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: tumor characteristics and clinical outcome

    Grazia Arpino;Valerie J Bardou;Gary M Clark;Richard M Elledge

  • Role of the Estrogen Receptor Coactivator AIB1 (SRC-3) and HER-2/neu in Tamoxifen Resistance in Breast Cancer

    C. Kent Osborne;Valerie Bardou;Torsten A. Hopp;Gary C. Chamness

  • Progesterone Receptor Status Significantly Improves Outcome Prediction Over Estrogen Receptor Status Alone for Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy in Two Large Breast Cancer Databases

    Valerie Jeanne Bardou;Grazia Arpino;Richard M. Elledge;C. Kent Osborne

  • Association of p53 Protein Expression With Tumor Cell Proliferation Rate and Clinical Outcome in Node-Negative Breast Cancer

    D. C. Allred;G. M. Clark;R. Elledge;S. A. W. Fuqua

  • Tumor Characteristics and Clinical Outcome of Elderly Women With Breast Cancer

    Sami G. Diab;Richard M. Elledge;Gary M. Clark

  • HER-2/neu oncogene protein and prognosis in breast cancer.

    Atul K. Tandon;Gary M. Clark;Gary C. Chamness;Axel Ullrich

  • Reporting recommendations for tumor marker prognostic studies.

    Lisa M. McShane;Douglas G. Altman;Willi Sauerbrei;Sheila E. Taube

  • Prediction of relapse or survival in patients with node-negative breast cancer by DNA flow cytometry.

    Gary M. Clark;Lynn G. Dressler;Marilyn A. Owens;George Pounds

  • Cathepsin D and prognosis in breast cancer.

    Atul K. Tandon;Gary M. Clark;Gary C. Chamness;John M. Chirgwin

  • HER-2/neu in node-negative breast cancer: prognostic significance of overexpression influenced by the presence of in situ carcinoma.

    D C Allred;G M Clark;A K Tandon;R Molina

  • Tumor biologic factors and breast cancer prognosis among white, Hispanic, and black women in the United States.

    Richard M. Elledge;Gary M. Clark;Gary C. Chamness;C. Kent Osborne

Frequent Co-Authors

William L. McGuire
William L. McGuire The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
Daniel D. Von Hoff
Daniel D. Von Hoff Translational Genomics Research Institute
C. Kent Osborne
C. Kent Osborne Baylor College of Medicine
D. Craig Allred
D. Craig Allred The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
Susan G. Hilsenbeck
Susan G. Hilsenbeck Baylor College of Medicine
Suzanne A. W. Fuqua
Suzanne A. W. Fuqua Baylor College of Medicine
Eleftherios P. Diamandis
Eleftherios P. Diamandis Mount Sinai Hospital
Douglas G. Altman
Douglas G. Altman University of Oxford
Nils Brünner
Nils Brünner University of Copenhagen
Carlos L. Arteaga
Carlos L. Arteaga The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center

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 online health degrees can open diverse career paths beyond traditional medicine. Prospective students often consider roles in healthcare administration or pharmacy, as these fields offer excellent opportunities for advancement and leadership.

A key concern for many students is the cost of education. If you're interested in administrative roles, it's helpful to compare healthcare administration degree cost to find affordable bachelor’s programs. For advanced credentials, options such as the cheapest master's in healthcare administration can lead to higher-level positions without overwhelming student debt.

Medical professionals looking to progress in clinical practice can also benefit from cheap dnp online programs, offering flexibility and convenience for working nurses aiming for leadership or educational roles. Similarly, those interested in pharmacy can explore accredited online pharmacy programs to advance their careers.

No matter your career goals, understanding online degree options and their associated costs is essential for planning a successful and sustainable pathway in healthcare.

Best Scientists Citing Gary M. Clark

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles