World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Jan Beyersmann

Jan Beyersmann

D-Index & Metrics

Mathematics

D-Index
35
Citations
5010
World Ranking
2787
National Ranking
170

Jan Beyersmann publication distribution in Mathematics in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Mathematics in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Jan Beyersmann sits on this spectrum.

42–46 publications: 3 scientists 47–51 publications: 5 scientists 52–56 publications: 7 scientists 57–61 publications: 20 scientists 62–66 publications: 14 scientists 67–71 publications: 25 scientists 72–76 publications: 19 scientists 77–81 publications: 35 scientists 82–86 publications: 50 scientists 87–91 publications: 60 scientists 92–96 publications: 86 scientists 97–101 publications: 84 scientists 102–106 publications: 83 scientists 107–111 publications: 90 scientists 112–116 publications: 99 scientists 117–121 publications: 90 scientists 122–126 publications: 91 scientists 127–131 publications: 109 scientists 132–136 publications: 110 scientists 137–141 publications: 98 scientists 142–146 publications: 112 scientists 147–151 publications: 102 scientists 152–156 publications: 88 scientists 157–161 publications: 106 scientists 162–166 publications: 83 scientists 167–171 publications: 102 scientists 172–176 publications: 77 scientists 177–181 publications: 81 scientists 182–186 publications: 78 scientists 187–191 publications: 71 scientists 192–196 publications: 92 scientists 197–201 publications: 64 scientists 202–206 publications: 69 scientists 207–211 publications: 64 scientists 212–216 publications: 62 scientists 217–221 publications: 58 scientists 222–226 publications: 53 scientists 227–231 publications: 50 scientists 232–236 publications: 46 scientists 237–241 publications: 46 scientists 242–246 publications: 46 scientists 247–251 publications: 43 scientists 252–256 publications: 29 scientists 257–261 publications: 45 scientists 262–266 publications: 30 scientists 267–271 publications: 33 scientists 272–276 publications: 34 scientists 277–281 publications: 30 scientists 282–286 publications: 31 scientists 287–291 publications: 21 scientists 292–296 publications: 34 scientists 297–301 publications: 26 scientists 302–306 publications: 10 scientists 307–311 publications: 17 scientists 312–316 publications: 23 scientists 317–321 publications: 13 scientists 322–326 publications: 16 scientists 327–331 publications: 26 scientists 332–336 publications: 13 scientists 337–341 publications: 13 scientists 342–346 publications: 16 scientists 347–351 publications: 17 scientists 352–356 publications: 12 scientists 357–361 publications: 18 scientists 362–366 publications: 18 scientists 367–371 publications: 9 scientists 372–376 publications: 11 scientists 377–381 publications: 8 scientists 382–386 publications: 8 scientists 387–391 publications: 9 scientists 392–396 publications: 9 scientists 397–401 publications: 8 scientists 402–406 publications: 11 scientists 407–411 publications: 6 scientists 412–416 publications: 6 scientists 417–421 publications: 9 scientists 422–426 publications: 8 scientists 427–431 publications: 5 scientists 432–436 publications: 8 scientists 437–441 publications: 8 scientists 442–446 publications: 4 scientists 447–451 publications: 4 scientists 452–456 publications: 4 scientists 457–461 publications: 2 scientists 462–466 publications: 2 scientists 467–471 publications: 4 scientists 472–476 publications: 3 scientists 477–481 publications: 3 scientists 482–486 publications: 6 scientists 487–491 publications: 3 scientists 492–496 publications: 5 scientists 497–501 publications: 5 scientists 502–506 publications: 1 scientists 507–511 publications: 6 scientists 512–516 publications: 4 scientists 517–521 publications: 1 scientists 522–526 publications: 3 scientists 527–531 publications: 1 scientists 532–536 publications: 4 scientists 537+ publications: 100 scientists
42 publications 537+

This scientist: 124 publications — 23rd percentile

23% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 537 publications or more.

Jan Beyersmann D-index placement in Mathematics in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Mathematics scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Jan Beyersmann sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 174 scientists 31 D-Index: 151 scientists 32 D-Index: 174 scientists 33 D-Index: 117 scientists 34 D-Index: 136 scientists 35 D-Index: 127 scientists 36 D-Index: 145 scientists 37 D-Index: 153 scientists 38 D-Index: 150 scientists 39 D-Index: 150 scientists 40 D-Index: 138 scientists 41 D-Index: 136 scientists 42 D-Index: 93 scientists 43 D-Index: 108 scientists 44 D-Index: 115 scientists 45 D-Index: 112 scientists 46 D-Index: 103 scientists 47 D-Index: 75 scientists 48 D-Index: 59 scientists 49 D-Index: 67 scientists 50 D-Index: 60 scientists 51 D-Index: 57 scientists 52 D-Index: 59 scientists 53 D-Index: 62 scientists 54 D-Index: 60 scientists 55 D-Index: 50 scientists 56 D-Index: 42 scientists 57 D-Index: 54 scientists 58 D-Index: 50 scientists 59 D-Index: 42 scientists 60 D-Index: 41 scientists 61 D-Index: 35 scientists 62 D-Index: 40 scientists 63 D-Index: 21 scientists 64 D-Index: 31 scientists 65 D-Index: 27 scientists 66 D-Index: 29 scientists 67 D-Index: 19 scientists 68 D-Index: 25 scientists 69 D-Index: 17 scientists 70 D-Index: 18 scientists 71 D-Index: 12 scientists 72 D-Index: 14 scientists 73 D-Index: 13 scientists 74 D-Index: 18 scientists 75 D-Index: 9 scientists 76 D-Index: 11 scientists 77 D-Index: 10 scientists 78 D-Index: 9 scientists 79 D-Index: 16 scientists 80 D-Index: 12 scientists 81 D-Index: 10 scientists 82 D-Index: 5 scientists 83 D-Index: 5 scientists 84 D-Index: 13 scientists 85 D-Index: 6 scientists 86+ D-Index: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 86+

This scientist: 35 D-Index — 25th percentile

25% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 86 D-Index or more.

Best Publications

  • A competing risks analysis should report results on all cause-specific hazards and cumulative incidence functions.

    Aurelien Latouche;Aurelien Latouche;Arthur Allignol;Jan Beyersmann;Myriam Labopin

  • Competing Risks and Multistate Models with R

    Jan Beyersmann;Arthur Allignol;Martin Schumacher

  • Simulating competing risks data in survival analysis.

    Jan Beyersmann;Jan Beyersmann;Aurélien Latouche;Anika Buchholz;Anika Buchholz;Martin Schumacher

  • The health and economic burden of bloodstream infections caused by antimicrobial-susceptible and non-susceptible Enterobacteriaceae and Staphylococcus aureus in European hospitals, 2010 and 2011: A multicentre retrospective cohort study

    Andréw James Stewardson;Arthur Allignol;Jan Beyersmann;Nicholas Graves

  • Empirical Transition Matrix of Multi-State Models: The etm Package

    Arthur Allignol;Martin Schumacher;Jan Beyersmann

  • Use of multistate models to assess prolongation of intensive care unit stay due to nosocomial infection.

    J Beyersmann;P Gastmeier;H Grundmann;S Bärwolff

  • An easy mathematical proof showed that time-dependent bias inevitably leads to biased effect estimation

    Jan Beyersmann;Jan Beyersmann;Petra Gastmeier;Martin Wolkewitz;Martin Wolkewitz;Martin Schumacher

  • Time-dependent covariates in the proportional subdistribution hazards model for competing risks

    Jan Beyersmann;Martin Schumacher

  • Boosting for high-dimensional time-to-event data with competing risks

    Harald Binder;Arthur Allignol;Martin Schumacher;Jan Beyersmann

  • Understanding competing risks: a simulation point of view

    Arthur Allignol;Arthur Allignol;Martin Schumacher;Christoph Wanner;Christiane Drechsler

  • Time-dependent study entries and exposures in cohort studies can easily be sources of different and avoidable types of bias

    Martin Wolkewitz;Arthur Allignol;Stéphan Juergen Harbarth;Giulia de Angelis

  • A competing risks analysis of bloodstream infection after stem-cell transplantation using subdistribution hazards and cause-specific hazards.

    Jan Beyersmann;Markus Dettenkofer;Hartmut Bertz;Martin Schumacher

  • Hospital-acquired infections—appropriate statistical treatment is urgently needed!

    Martin Schumacher;Arthur Allignol;Jan Beyersmann;Nadine Binder

  • The impact of time‐dependent bias in proportional hazards modelling

    Jan Beyersmann;Jan Beyersmann;Martin Wolkewitz;Martin Wolkewitz;Martin Schumacher

  • Proportional subdistribution hazards modeling offers a summary analysis, even if misspecified

    Nadine Grambauer;Martin Schumacher;Jan Beyersmann;Jan Beyersmann

  • Quantifying the predictive accuracy of time‐to‐event models in the presence of competing risks

    Rotraut Schoop;Rotraut Schoop;Jan Beyersmann;Jan Beyersmann;Martin Schumacher;Harald Binder;Harald Binder

  • Statistical issues in the analysis of adverse events in time-to-event data

    Arthur Allignol;Jan Beyersmann;Claudia Schmoor

  • Application of multistate models in hospital epidemiology: advances and challenges.

    Jan Beyersmann;Martin Wolkewitz;Martin Wolkewitz;Arthur Allignol;Arthur Allignol;Nadine Grambauer;Nadine Grambauer

  • Modeling the effect of time-dependent exposure on intensive care unit mortality

    Martin Wolkewitz;Martin Wolkewitz;Jan Beyersmann;Jan Beyersmann;Petra Gastmeier;Martin Schumacher

  • A note on variance estimation of the Aalen-Johansen estimator of the cumulative incidence function in competing risks, with a view towards left-truncated data.

    Arthur Allignol;Martin Schumacher;Jan Beyersmann;Jan Beyersmann

Frequent Co-Authors

Martin Schumacher
Martin Schumacher University of Freiburg
Stéphan Juergen Harbarth
Stéphan Juergen Harbarth University of Geneva
Nicholas Graves
Nicholas Graves Queensland University of Technology
Petra Gastmeier
Petra Gastmeier Charité - University Medicine Berlin
Hein Putter
Hein Putter Leiden University Medical Center
Hermann Brenner
Hermann Brenner German Cancer Research Center
Dietrich Rothenbacher
Dietrich Rothenbacher University of Ulm
Wolfgang Rathmann
Wolfgang Rathmann Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf
Jürgen Finke
Jürgen Finke University of Freiburg
Hajo Grundmann
Hajo Grundmann University of Freiburg

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

For those studying Mathematics in the USA, exploring related online degrees can open diverse career opportunities. Many professionals seek advanced qualifications that complement their analytical skills, such as a business degree. Programs highlighted in the easiest online MBA can provide a flexible path for math graduates looking to enhance their management expertise without prolonged time commitments.

Similarly, individuals interested in leadership roles might consider a specialized doctorate. The best 1 year DBA program online offers a fast-track option for professionals aiming to deepen their strategic and operational knowledge in business administration.

For those focusing on financial mathematics, an advanced degree like a master of finance online can be particularly valuable. It bridges mathematical theory with real-world financial applications, enhancing career prospects in banking, investment, and risk management sectors.

With growing demand for accelerated education, many programs also highlight the shortest online MBA options. These programs suit those eager to transition quickly into new fields or leadership positions by leveraging their math background efficiently.

Best Scientists Citing Jan Beyersmann

Recently Published Articles