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 106 6350 5973 3389 3143 297 84264

Gary M. Clark publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Gary M. Clark between 1963 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Gary M. Clark published across 63 years, from 1963 to 2025, averaging 4.8 papers a year. Output peaked at 19 publications in 1993. 3 of the 301 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1963 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 19. Peak 19 publications in 1993. 1963: 1 publication 1964: 0 publications 1965: 0 publications 1966: 0 publications 1967: 0 publications 1968: 0 publications 1969: 0 publications 1970: 0 publications 1971: 0 publications 1972: 0 publications 1973: 0 publications 1974: 0 publications 1975: 0 publications 1976: 0 publications 1977: 1 publication 1978: 3 publications 1979: 0 publications 1980: 0 publications 1981: 8 publications 1982: 3 publications 1983: 16 publications 1984: 8 publications 1985: 3 publications 1986: 12 publications 1987: 9 publications 1988: 15 publications 1989: 12 publications 1990: 6 publications 1991: 8 publications 1992: 16 publications 1993: 19 publications 1994: 15 publications 1995: 10 publications 1996: 5 publications 1997: 13 publications 1998: 17 publications 1999: 10 publications 2000: 12 publications 2001: 9 publications 2002: 7 publications 2003: 13 publications 2004: 9 publications 2005: 14 publications 2006: 8 publications 2007: 3 publications 2008: 3 publications 2009: 1 publication 2010: 0 publications 2011: 1 publication 2012: 0 publications 2013: 0 publications 2014: 0 publications 2015: 0 publications 2016: 2 publications 2017: 0 publications 2018: 0 publications 2019: 0 publications 2020: 1 publication 2021: 1 publication 2022: 0 publications 2023: 4 publications 2024: 2 publications 2025: 1 publication
1963 2025

301 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Gary M. Clark: publications per year, 1963 to 2025
Year Publications
1963 1
1964 0
1965 0
1966 0
1967 0
1968 0
1969 0
1970 0
1971 0
1972 0
1973 0
1974 0
1975 0
1976 0
1977 1
1978 3
1979 0
1980 0
1981 8
1982 3
1983 16
1984 8
1985 3
1986 12
1987 9
1988 15
1989 12
1990 6
1991 8
1992 16
1993 19
1994 15
1995 10
1996 5
1997 13
1998 17
1999 10
2000 12
2001 9
2002 7
2003 13
2004 9
2005 14
2006 8
2007 3
2008 3
2009 1
2010 0
2011 1
2012 0
2013 0
2014 0
2015 0
2016 2
2017 0
2018 0
2019 0
2020 1
2021 1
2022 0
2023 4
2024 2
2025 1
Total 301
Download as CSV

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.

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, 281–300 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: 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.

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
281–300 768 297
301–320 834
321–340 895
341–360 922
361–380 838
381–400 861
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

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.

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, 106–107 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: 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.

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
102–103 630
104–105 513
106–107 541 106
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

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