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 132 2279 2121 1286 1178 806 84289

James B. Young publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by James B. Young between 1950 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. James B. Young published across 76 years, from 1950 to 2025, averaging 11.7 papers a year. Output peaked at 67 publications in 2004. 35 of the 886 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
20 40 60
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1950 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 67. Peak 67 publications in 2004. 1950: 1 publication 1951: 0 publications 1952: 0 publications 1953: 0 publications 1954: 0 publications 1955: 0 publications 1956: 0 publications 1957: 0 publications 1958: 0 publications 1959: 0 publications 1960: 0 publications 1961: 0 publications 1962: 0 publications 1963: 0 publications 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: 0 publications 1978: 3 publications 1979: 3 publications 1980: 9 publications 1981: 7 publications 1982: 4 publications 1983: 4 publications 1984: 6 publications 1985: 6 publications 1986: 5 publications 1987: 6 publications 1988: 9 publications 1989: 7 publications 1990: 4 publications 1991: 17 publications 1992: 9 publications 1993: 7 publications 1994: 13 publications 1995: 11 publications 1996: 16 publications 1997: 9 publications 1998: 35 publications 1999: 26 publications 2000: 35 publications 2001: 31 publications 2002: 44 publications 2003: 56 publications 2004: 67 publications 2005: 40 publications 2006: 34 publications 2007: 47 publications 2008: 48 publications 2009: 25 publications 2010: 24 publications 2011: 16 publications 2012: 16 publications 2013: 17 publications 2014: 13 publications 2015: 10 publications 2016: 18 publications 2017: 8 publications 2018: 13 publications 2019: 5 publications 2020: 20 publications 2021: 9 publications 2022: 21 publications 2023: 17 publications 2024: 17 publications 2025: 18 publications
1950 2025

886 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
James B. Young: publications per year, 1950 to 2025
Year Publications
1950 1
1951 0
1952 0
1953 0
1954 0
1955 0
1956 0
1957 0
1958 0
1959 0
1960 0
1961 0
1962 0
1963 0
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 0
1978 3
1979 3
1980 9
1981 7
1982 4
1983 4
1984 6
1985 6
1986 5
1987 6
1988 9
1989 7
1990 4
1991 17
1992 9
1993 7
1994 13
1995 11
1996 16
1997 9
1998 35
1999 26
2000 35
2001 31
2002 44
2003 56
2004 67
2005 40
2006 34
2007 47
2008 48
2009 25
2010 24
2011 16
2012 16
2013 17
2014 13
2015 10
2016 18
2017 8
2018 13
2019 5
2020 20
2021 9
2022 21
2023 17
2024 17
2025 18
Total 886
Download as CSV

James B. Young 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 James B. Young 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, 801–820 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: 806 publications — 87th percentile

87% 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
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
801–820 204 806
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

James B. Young 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 James B. Young 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, 132–133 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: 132 D-Index — 89th percentile

89% 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
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
132–133 168 132
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

James B. Young is affiliated with the Cleveland Clinic in the United States. Their primary field of research is Medicine, with a strong focus on Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Surgery, Biomedical Engineering, Infectious Diseases, and Clinical Psychology. The scientist has produced a significant body of work centered on heart failure treatment and management, mechanical circulatory support devices, and clinical research related to COVID-19.

Key topics of their research include:

  • Heart Failure Treatment and Management
  • Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices
  • COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
  • Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
  • Cardiac Structural Anomalies and Repair
  • COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • COVID-19 and healthcare impacts

James B. Young has collaborated frequently with several researchers, including:

  • W.H. Wilson Tang (10 coauthored works)
  • Lara Jehi (9 coauthored works)
  • William T. Abraham (9 coauthored works)
  • Alex Milinovich (8 coauthored works)
  • Justin C. Cordova (8 coauthored works)

The scientist's publications have appeared in numerous venues, with frequent contributions to:

  • Methodist DeBakey Cardiovascular Journal (29 publications)
  • International Journal of Social Science Studies (27 publications)
  • UNC Libraries (9 publications)
  • Journal of Cardiac Failure (4 publications)
  • Journal of General Internal Medicine (3 publications)

Notable recent papers authored or coauthored by James B. Young include:

  • "Association of Use of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors and Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers With Testing Positive for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)", 2020, JAMA Cardiology
  • "Individualizing Risk Prediction for Positive Coronavirus Disease 2019 Testing", 2020, CHEST Journal
  • "Development and validation of a model for individualized prediction of hospitalization risk in 4,536 patients with COVID-19", 2020, PLoS ONE
  • "SARS-CoV-2 and ACE2: The biology and clinical data settling the ARB and ACEI controversy", 2020, EBioMedicine
  • "Mavrilimumab in patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia and systemic hyperinflammation (MASH-COVID): an investigator initiated, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial", 2021, The Lancet Rheumatology

Best Publications

  • Contemporary Definitions and Classification of the Cardiomyopathies An American Heart Association Scientific Statement From the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Heart Failure and Transplantation Committee; Quality of Care and Outcomes Research and Functional Genomics and Translational Biology Interdisciplinary Working Groups; and Council on Epidemiology and Prevention

    Barry J. Maron;Jeffrey A. Towbin;Gaetano Thiene;Charles Antzelevitch

  • Albuminuria and risk of cardiovascular events, death, and heart failure in diabetic and nondiabetic individuals

    Hertzel C. Gerstein;Johannes F. E. Mann;Qilong Yi;Bernard Zinman

  • Combined cardiac resynchronization and implantable cardioversion defibrillation in advanced chronic heart failure: the MIRACLE ICD Trial.

    James B. Young;William T. Abraham;Andrew L. Smith;Angel R. Leon

  • Evaluation study of congestive heart failure and pulmonary artery catheterization effectiveness

    James A. Hill;Daniel F. Pauly;Debra R. Olitsky;Stuart Russell

  • Proinflammatory cytokine levels in patients with depressed left ventricular ejection fraction: A report from the studies of left ventricular dysfunction (SOLVD)

    Guillermo Torre-Amione;Samir Kapadia;Claude Benedict;Hakan Oral

  • Importance of Venous Congestion for Worsening of Renal Function in Advanced Decompensated Heart Failure

    Wilfried Mullens;Zuheir Abrahams;Gary S. Francis;George Sokos

  • Seventh INTERMACS annual report: 15,000 patients and counting

    James K. Kirklin;David C. Naftel;Francis D. Pagani;Robert L. Kormos

  • Characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of patients with preserved systolic function hospitalized for heart failure: a report from the OPTIMIZE-HF Registry.

    Gregg C. Fonarow;Wendy Gattis Stough;William T. Abraham;Nancy M. Albert

  • Cytokines and Cytokine Receptors in Advanced Heart Failure An Analysis of the Cytokine Database from the Vesnarinone Trial (VEST)

    Anita Deswal;Nancy J. Petersen;Arthur M. Feldman;James B. Young

  • Tumor Necrosis Factor-α and Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptors in the Failing Human Heart

    Guillermo Torre-Amione;Samir Kapadia;Joseph Lee;Jean Bernard Durand

  • Comparison of candesartan, enalapril, and their combination in congestive heart failure: randomized evaluation of strategies for left ventricular dysfunction (RESOLVD) pilot study. The RESOLVD Pilot Study Investigators.

    R. S. McKelvie;S. Yusuf;D. Pericak;A. Avezum

  • Eighth annual INTERMACS report: Special focus on framing the impact of adverse events.

    James K. Kirklin;Francis D. Pagani;Robert L. Kormos;Lynne W. Stevenson

  • Incidence, predictors at admission, and impact of worsening renal function among patients hospitalized with heart failure.

    Daniel E. Forman;Javed Butler;Yongfei Wang;William T. Abraham

  • Systolic Blood Pressure at Admission, Clinical Characteristics, and Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized With Acute Heart Failure

    Mihai Gheorghiade;William T. Abraham;Nancy M. Albert;Barry H. Greenberg

  • A new, simplified and accurate method for determining ejection fraction with two-dimensional echocardiography.

    Miguel A. Quiñones;A. D. Waggoner;L. A. Reduto;J. G. Nelson

  • Withdrawal of digoxin from patients with chronic heart failure treated with angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors.

    Milton Packer;Milton Packer;Mihai Gheorghiade;James B. Young;Peter J. Costantini

  • High Prevalence of Coronary Atherosclerosis in Asymptomatic Teenagers and Young Adults Evidence From Intravascular Ultrasound

    E. Murat Tuzcu;Samir R. Kapadia;Eralp Tutar;Khaled M. Ziada

  • Sixth INTERMACS annual report: a 10,000-patient database.

    James K. Kirklin;David C. Naftel;Francis D. Pagani;Robert L. Kormos

  • Impact of diabetes on outcomes in patients with low and preserved ejection fraction heart failure: an analysis of the Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity (CHARM) programme.

    Michael R. MacDonald;Mark C. Petrie;Fumi Varyani;Jan Östergren

  • 555 Importance of venous congestion for worsening of renal function in advanced decompensated heart failure

    W. Mullens;Z. Abrahams;G. Francis;G. Sokos

Frequent Co-Authors

Randall C. Starling
Randall C. Starling Cleveland Clinic
Patrick M. McCarthy
Patrick M. McCarthy Northwestern University
Nicholas G. Smedira
Nicholas G. Smedira Cleveland Clinic
William T. Abraham
William T. Abraham The Ohio State University
David C. Naftel
David C. Naftel University of Alabama at Birmingham
Mihai Gheorghiade
Mihai Gheorghiade Northwestern University
James K. Kirklin
James K. Kirklin University of Alabama at Birmingham
Lynne W. Stevenson
Lynne W. Stevenson Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Clyde W. Yancy
Clyde W. Yancy Northwestern University
Nancy M. Albert
Nancy M. Albert 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

A medical career isn't limited to becoming a doctor. Some students may want complementary degrees, interdisciplinary roles, or specialized expertise alongside—or instead of—a traditional MD. There are many high-quality online pathways that align with healthcare careers.

For those excited by the science of diet and wellness, a nutrition bachelor degree online can be the first step towards roles in community health, research, or clinical nutrition. Aspiring hospital administrators or healthcare leaders might pursue accredited mha programs to build business and management skills tailored for medical environments.

Many registered nurses are now expanding their qualifications by enrolling in rn to bsn programs to open up more leadership opportunities and enhance patient care. For nurses wanting to reach the highest levels of practice, dnp programs online offer advanced clinical and research training—often with flexible, accelerated formats.

No matter your interests, these online medical and healthcare degrees can broaden your career options and offer more tailored pathways into the dynamic world of medicine in the USA.

Best Scientists Citing James B. Young

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles