World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
113
Citations
47717
World Ranking
4949
National Ranking
2685

James D. Cox 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 D. Cox 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: 700 publications — 81st percentile

81% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

James D. Cox 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 D. Cox 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: 113 D-Index — 76th percentile

76% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

James D. Cox was affiliated with The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in the United States. Their research contributions spanned multiple fields, primarily within medicine, with a focus on pulmonary and respiratory medicine, rheumatology, accounting, cardiology and cardiovascular medicine, and industrial and manufacturing engineering.

The scientist's work explored a variety of topics including:

  • Corporate Law and Human Rights
  • Superconducting and THz Device Technology
  • Mycobacterium Research and Diagnosis
  • Corporate Insolvency and Governance
  • Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems
  • Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research
  • Rheumatoid Arthritis Research and Therapies

James D. Cox's publication record includes contributions to several journals and conferences, with their most frequent venues being:

  • SSRN Electronic Journal
  • Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
  • American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
  • Marine Fisheries Review
  • Australian Geomechanics Journal

The scientist's recent papers included:

  • "Processing Tuna, Scombridae, for Canning: A Review" (2023) published in Marine Fisheries Review
  • "A Photographic Essay on Landslides Across Southeastern New South Wales Triggered by the Rainfull Events of 2022" (2022) published in Australian Geomechanics Journal
  • "Optimization of a cryogenic transition-edge sensor detector array for far-infrared astrophysics" (2022) published in Space Telescopes and Instrumentation 2022: Optical, Infrared, and Millimeter Wave
  • "Petition for Rulemaking on Short and Distort" (2020) published in SSRN Electronic Journal
  • "The SEC's Shareholder Proposal Rule" (2022) published in Columbia Business Law Review

Collaborations featured frequent co-authors such as:

  • Randall S. Thomas
  • Alberto Avolio
  • Mark Butlin
  • Locke D. Spencer
  • R. Sudiwala

Best Publications

  • Toxicity criteria of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) and the European organization for research and treatment of cancer (EORTC)

    James D. Cox;Jo Ann Stetz;Thomas F. Pajak

  • Consensus statement: Guidelines for PSA following radiation therapy

    James D. Cox;David J. Grignon;Richard S. Kaplan;James T. Parsons

  • Radiotherapy plus chemotherapy with or without surgical resection for stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: a phase III randomised controlled trial

    Kathy S Albain;R Suzanne Swann;Valerie W Rusch;Andrew T Turrisi

  • Sequential vs Concurrent Chemoradiation for Stage III Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer: Randomized Phase III Trial RTOG 9410

    Walter J. Curran;Rebecca Paulus;Corey J. Langer;Ritsuko Komaki

  • Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 88–08 and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 4588: Preliminary Results of a Phase III Trial in Regionally Advanced, Unresectable Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

    William T. Sause;Charles Scott;Samuel Taylor;David H Johnson

  • A randomized phase I/II trial of hyperfractionated radiation therapy with total doses of 60.0 Gy to 79.2 Gy: possible survival benefit with greater than or equal to 69.6 Gy in favorable patients with Radiation Therapy Oncology Group stage III non-small-cell lung carcinoma: report of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 83-11.

    J D Cox;N Azarnia;R W Byhardt;K H Shin

  • Long-term treatment sequelae following external beam irradiation for adenocarcinoma of the prostate: analysis of RTOG studies 7506 and 7706

    Colleen A. Lawton;Minhee Won;Miljenko V. Pilepich;Sucha O. Asbell

  • Second malignancies in patients who have head and neck cancer: incidence, effect on survival and implications based on the RTOG experience.

    Jay S. Cooper;Thomas F. Pajak;Philip Rubin;Leslie Tupchong

  • Analysis of clinical and dosimetric factors associated with treatment-related pneumonitis (TRP) in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treated with concurrent chemotherapy and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT)

    Shulian Wang;Zhongxing Liao;Xiong Wei;Helen H. Liu

  • Phase III comparison of sequential vs concurrent chemoradiation for pts with unresected stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Report of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 9410

    W Curran;C Scott;C Langer;R Komaki

  • Increased risk of biochemical and local failure in patients with distended rectum on the planning CT for prostate cancer radiotherapy.

    Renaud de Crevoisier;Susan L. Tucker;Lei Dong;Radhe Mohan

  • Consensus statements on radiation therapy of prostate cancer: guidelines for prostate re-biopsy after radiation and for radiation therapy with rising prostate-specific antigen levels after radical prostatectomy. American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Consensus Panel.

    J D Cox;M J Gallagher;E H Hammond;R S Kaplan

  • Significant reduction of normal tissue dose by proton radiotherapy compared with three-dimensional conformal or intensity-modulated radiation therapy in Stage I or Stage III non–small-cell lung cancer

    Joe Y. Chang;Xiaodong Zhang;Xiaochun Wang;Yixiu Kang

  • Assessing Respiration-Induced Tumor Motion and Internal Target Volume Using Four-Dimensional Computed Tomography for Radiotherapy of Lung Cancer

    H. Helen Liu;Peter Balter;Teresa Tutt;Bum Choi

  • Risk Factors, Treatment, and Outcome of Central Nervous System Recurrence in Adults With Intermediate-Grade and Immunoblastic Lymphoma

    Koen van Besien;Chul S. Ha;Sandy Murphy;Peter McLaughlin

  • [18F] fluorodeoxyglucose uptake by positron emission tomography predicts outcome of non-small-cell lung cancer

    Ryohei Sasaki;Ritsuko Komaki;Homer Macapinlac;Jeremy Erasmus

  • Tumor Irradiation Increases the Recruitment of Circulating Mesenchymal Stem Cells into the Tumor Microenvironment

    Ann H. Klopp;Erika L. Spaeth;Jennifer L. Dembinski;Wendy A. Woodward

  • Dose and volume reduction for normal lung using intensity-modulated radiotherapy for advanced-stage non–small-cell lung cancer

    Hasan Murshed;H.Helen Liu;Zhongxing Liao;Jerry L Barker

  • 2-Fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography imaging is predictive of pathologic response and survival after preoperative chemoradiation in patients with esophageal carcinoma.

    Stephen G. Swisher;Jeremy Erasmus;Mary Maish;Arlene M. Correa

  • Intensity-Modulated Proton Therapy Reduces the Dose to Normal Tissue Compared With Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy or Passive Scattering Proton Therapy and Enables Individualized Radical Radiotherapy for Extensive Stage IIIB Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer: A Virtual Clinical Study

    Xiaodong Zhang;Yupeng Li;Xiaoning Pan;Li Xiaoqiang

Frequent Co-Authors

Ritsuko Komaki
Ritsuko Komaki The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Radhe Mohan
Radhe Mohan The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Zhongxing Liao
Zhongxing Liao The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Pamela K. Allen
Pamela K. Allen The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Susan L. Tucker
Susan L. Tucker The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Joe Y. Chang
Joe Y. Chang The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Fernando Cabanillas
Fernando Cabanillas The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Jaffer A. Ajani
Jaffer A. Ajani The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Jack A. Roth
Jack A. Roth The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
Stephen G. Swisher
Stephen G. Swisher The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer 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

If you’re interested in healthcare but unsure about medical school, there are several alternative online degrees and careers to consider. For those looking to join the healthcare workforce quickly, lpn program options offer a fast-track pathway to becoming a Licensed Practical Nurse. These programs can often be completed in as little as one year, providing a flexible entry point for aspiring nurses.

For registered nurses aiming to take on specialized roles, the msn to pmhnp online route offers advanced training to become a Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner. This online program allows working professionals to balance studies with other commitments while stepping up their qualifications.

Not all medical-related careers are clinical. If administration appeals to you, consider the healthcare administration degree cost analysis to compare affordable online options. Similarly, for those seeking advanced leadership roles, reviewing the mha degree cost options can help you find a master’s program that fits your budget.

Best Scientists Citing James D. Cox

Recently Published Articles