World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Jean G. Dumesnil

Jean G. Dumesnil

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
74
Citations
21873
World Ranking
19363
National Ranking
823

Jean G. Dumesnil 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 Jean G. Dumesnil 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: 291 publications — 15th percentile

15% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Jean G. Dumesnil 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 Jean G. Dumesnil 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: 74 D-Index — 4th percentile

4% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Jean G. Dumesnil was affiliated with Université Laval in Canada and contributed extensively to the fields of medicine and engineering throughout their career. Their research primarily intersected areas in radiology, nuclear medicine, biomedical engineering, cardiology, and mechanics of materials.

The scientist published prolifically, focusing on ultrasound imaging and elastography with a total of 34 publications in that area. Other significant topics of their work included photoacoustic and ultrasonic imaging, cardiovascular function and risk factors, advanced MRI techniques and applications, ultrasound and hyperthermia applications, cardiac valve diseases and treatments, and ultrasonics and acoustic wave propagation.

Jean G. Dumesnil was regularly published in prominent venues, including:

  • IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control (33 publications)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (6 publications)
  • Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine (3 publications)
  • 2022 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS) (3 publications)
  • Ultrasonics (2 publications)

Their frequent co-authors comprised several researchers with whom they collaborated extensively, including Hassan Rivaz, Mark Schafer (President), Dragan Damjanovic (President-Elect), Dan Stevens, and Alfred C. H. Yu.

Significant recent papers authored or co-authored by Jean G. Dumesnil included:

  • So you think you can DAS? A viewpoint on delay-and-sum beamforming, 2020, Ultrasonics
  • SIMUS: An open-source simulator for medical ultrasound imaging. Part I: Theory & examples, 2022, Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
  • Complex Convolutional Neural Networks for Ultrafast Ultrasound Imaging Reconstruction From In-Phase/Quadrature Signal, 2021, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control
  • Reconstruction for Diverging-Wave Imaging Using Deep Convolutional Neural Networks, 2020, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control
  • SIMUS: An open-source simulator for medical ultrasound imaging. Part II: Comparison with four simulators, 2022, Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine

Their work combined engineering principles with clinical applications, particularly focusing on cardiovascular and imaging technologies. Through these research endeavors, they contributed to evolving medical imaging methods and computational modeling techniques.

Best Publications

  • Recommendations for Evaluation of Prosthetic Valves With Echocardiography and Doppler Ultrasound. A Report From the American Society of Echocardiography's Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Task Force on Prosthetic Valves, Developed in Conjunction With the American College of Cardiology Cardiovascular Imaging Committee, Cardiac Imaging Committee of the American Heart Association

    William A. Zoghbi;John B. Chambers;Jean G. Dumesnil;Elyse Foster

  • Paradoxical low-flow, low-gradient severe aortic stenosis despite preserved ejection Fraction is associated with higher afterload and reduced survival

    Zeineb Hachicha;Jean G. Dumesnil;Peter Bogaty;Philippe Pibarot

  • Effect of Lipid Lowering With Rosuvastatin on Progression of Aortic Stenosis Results of the Aortic Stenosis Progression Observation: Measuring Effects of Rosuvastatin (ASTRONOMER) Trial

    Kwan Leung Chan;Koon Teo;Jean G. Dumesnil;Andy Ni

  • Prosthetic Heart Valves Selection of the Optimal Prosthesis and Long-Term Management

    Philippe Pibarot;Jean G. Dumesnil

  • Diastolic Dysfunction in Normotensive Men with Well-Controlled Type 2 Diabetes: Importance of maneuvers in echocardiographic screening for preclinical diabetic cardiomyopathy

    Paul Poirier;Peter Bogaty;Caroline Garneau;Louise Marois

  • Hemodynamic and clinical impact of prosthesis–patient mismatch in the aortic valve position and its prevention

    Philippe Pibarot;Jean G Dumesnil

  • Impact of Valve Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch on Short-Term Mortality After Aortic Valve Replacement

    Claudia Blais;Jean G. Dumesnil;Richard Baillot;Serge Simard

  • Prosthesis‐patient mismatch: definition, clinical impact, and prevention

    Philippe Pibarot;Jean G Dumesnil

  • Reduced Systemic Arterial Compliance Impacts Significantly on Left Ventricular Afterload and Function in Aortic Stenosis Implications for Diagnosis and Treatment

    Martin Briand;Jean G. Dumesnil;Lyes Kadem;Antonio Gervais Tongué

  • Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis With Normal and Depressed Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

    Philippe Pibarot;Jean G. Dumesnil

  • Usefulness of the Valvuloarterial Impedance to Predict Adverse Outcome in Asymptomatic Aortic Stenosis

    Zeineb Hachicha;Jean G. Dumesnil;Philippe Pibarot

  • Outcome of patients with aortic stenosis, small valve area, and low-flow, low-gradient despite preserved left ventricular ejection fraction.

    Marie-Annick Clavel;Jean G. Dumesnil;Romain Capoulade;Patrick Mathieu

  • Paradoxical low flow and/or low gradient severe aortic stenosis despite preserved left ventricular ejection fraction: implications for diagnosis and treatment.

    Jean G. Dumesnil;Philippe Pibarot;Blase Carabello

  • Oxidized Phospholipids, Lipoprotein(a), and Progression of Calcific Aortic Valve Stenosis

    Romain Capoulade;Kwan L. Chan;Calvin Yeang;Patrick Mathieu

  • Assessment of Aortic Valve Stenosis Severity A New Index Based on the Energy Loss Concept

    Damien Garcia;Philippe Pibarot;Jean G. Dumesnil;Frédéric Sakr

  • Comparison between transcatheter and surgical prosthetic valve implantation in patients with severe aortic stenosis and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.

    M.A. Clavel;J.G. Webb;J. Rodés-Cabau;J.B. Masson

  • Projected Valve Area at Normal Flow Rate Improves the Assessment of Stenosis Severity in Patients With Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis The Multicenter TOPAS (Truly or Pseudo-Severe Aortic Stenosis) Study

    Claudia Blais;Ian G. Burwash;Gerald Mundigler;Jean G. Dumesnil

  • Validation of applications of indexed aortic prosthetic valve areas calculated by Doppler echocardiography

    Jean G. Dumesnil;George N. Honos;Michel Lemieux;Jocelyn Beauchemin

  • Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation : insights on prognostic factors and valve durability from the Canadian multicenter experience

    Josep Rodés-Cabau;John G. Webb;Anson Cheung;Jian Ye

  • Response to Letter Regarding Article, “Paradoxical Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis Despite Preserved Ejection Fraction Is Associated With Higher Afterload and Reduced Survival”

    Philippe Pibarot;Jean G. Dumesnil;Peter Bogaty;Zeineb Hachicha

Frequent Co-Authors

Philippe Pibarot
Philippe Pibarot Université Laval
Marie-Annick Clavel
Marie-Annick Clavel Université Laval
Jean-Pierre Després
Jean-Pierre Després Université Laval
Koon K. Teo
Koon K. Teo McMaster University
Helmut Baumgartner
Helmut Baumgartner University Hospital of Münster
Josep Rodés-Cabau
Josep Rodés-Cabau Université Laval
Paul Poirier
Paul Poirier Université Laval
Yohan Bossé
Yohan Bossé Université Laval
Gilles R. Dagenais
Gilles R. Dagenais Université Laval
Rob S. Beanlands
Rob S. Beanlands University of Ottawa

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

Medical education doesn’t have to be limited to traditional in-person programs. For those interested in a healthcare career, a wide variety of accredited online degrees offer flexibility and affordability. These pathways range from foundational nursing qualifications to advanced practice roles, enabling students to balance study with work or family commitments.

Prospective nurse practitioners can take advantage of the cheapest np school online options, making this advanced degree more accessible. Similarly, cheap online nursing programs are ideal for those starting their journey in the nursing field or seeking new credentials without incurring substantial debt.

For those aiming for leadership or academic positions, the cheapest online dnp programs provide a pathway toward doctorate-level expertise. Additionally, registered nurses looking to widen their scope can benefit from cheap rn to bsn online programs, bridging their qualifications in a cost-effective manner.

Exploring these affordable online education options is a smart step for anyone planning a medical career in the USA, ensuring a strong foundation and greater career mobility.

Best Scientists Citing Jean G. Dumesnil

Recently Published Articles