World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
127
Citations
92881
World Ranking
2768
National Ranking
1544

Jeffrey W. Moses 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 Jeffrey W. Moses 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: 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 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 903 publications — 91st percentile

91% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Jeffrey W. Moses 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 Jeffrey W. Moses 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: 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 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 127 D-Index — 86th percentile

86% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Jeffrey W. Moses is affiliated with Columbia University Medical Center in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on medicine, with significant contributions in the subfields of surgery, cardiology and cardiovascular medicine, radiology, nuclear medicine and imaging, pulmonary and respiratory medicine, and biomedical engineering.

Their main topics of work include coronary interventions and diagnostics, cardiac imaging and diagnostics, acute myocardial infarction research, cardiac, anesthesia and surgical outcomes, cardiac valve diseases and treatments, mechanical circulatory support devices, and peripheral artery disease management.

Recent publications by Jeffrey W. Moses include:

  • Definitions and Clinical Trial Design Principles for Coronary Artery Chronic Total Occlusion Therapies: CTO-ARC Consensus Recommendations, 2021, Circulation
  • Trends and Outcomes of Restenosis After Coronary Stent Implantation in the United States, 2020, Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Global Chronic Total Occlusion Crossing Algorithm, 2021, Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Mortality after drug-eluting stents vs. coronary artery bypass grafting for left main coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, 2020, European Heart Journal
  • Complete versus incomplete coronary revascularization: definitions, assessment and outcomes, 2020, Nature Reviews Cardiology

Jeffrey W. Moses frequently collaborates with several co-authors, including:

  • Ziad A. Ali
  • Ajay J. Kirtane
  • Akiko Maehara
  • Richard Shlofmitz
  • Gary S. Mintz

The scientist has published extensively in a number of key venues related to cardiovascular medicine and interventions. The most frequent venues include:

  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions
  • JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
  • Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
  • Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine

Best Publications

  • Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Who Cannot Undergo Surgery

    Martin B. Leon;Craig R. Smith;Michael Mack;D. Craig Miller

  • Transcatheter versus Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in High-Risk Patients

    Craig R. Smith;Martin B. Leon;Michael J. Mack;D. Craig Miller

  • Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery.

    Jeffrey W. Moses;Martin B. Leon;Jeffrey J. Popma;Peter J. Fitzgerald

  • Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients.

    Martin B Leon;Craig R. Smith;Michael J. Mack;Michael J. Mack;Rajendra Makkar

  • A simple risk score for prediction of contrast-induced nephropathy after percutaneous coronary intervention: Development and initial validation

    Roxana Mehran;Eve D. Aymong;Eugenia Nikolsky;Zoran Lasic

  • Safety and efficacy of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents

    Gregg W. Stone;Jeffrey W. Moses;Stephen G. Ellis;Joachim Schofer

  • 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial

    Michael J Mack;Martin B Leon;Craig R Smith;D Craig Miller

  • Bivalirudin for Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes

    Gregg W. Stone;Brent T. McLaurin;David A. Cox;Michel E. Bertrand

  • Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement for Inoperable Severe Aortic Stenosis

    Raj R Makkar;Gregory P Fontana;Hasan Jilaihawi;Samir Kapadia

  • Transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis

    Vinod H. Thourani;Susheel Kodali;Raj R. Makkar;Howard C. Herrmann

  • Randomized study to evaluate Sirolimus-eluting stents implanted at coronary bifurcation lesions

    Antonio Colombo;Jeffrey W. Moses;Marie Claude Morice;Josef Ludwig

  • Impact of major bleeding on 30-day mortality and clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes: an analysis from the ACUITY trial

    Steven V. Manoukian;Frederick Feit;Roxana Mehran;Michele D. Voeltz

  • Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Blockade With Primary Angioplasty for Acute Myocardial Infarction

    S. J. Brener;L. A. Barr;J. E. B. Burchenal;S. Katz

  • Stent underexpansion and residual reference segment stenosis are related to stent thrombosis after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation: An intravascular ultrasound study

    Kenichi Fujii;Stéphane G. Carlier;Gary S. Mintz;Yi-ming Yang

  • Localized intracoronary gamma-radiation therapy to inhibit the recurrence of restenosis after stenting

    Martin B. Leon;Paul S. Teirstein;Jeffrey W. Moses;Prabhakar Tripuraneni

  • A prospective, randomized clinical trial of hemodynamic support with Impella 2.5 versus intra-aortic balloon pump in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: the PROTECT II study.

    William W. O'Neill;Neal S. Kleiman;Jeffrey Moses;Jose P.S. Henriques

  • Percutaneous recanalization of chronically occluded coronary arteries: a consensus document: part II.

    Gregg W. Stone;David E. Kandzari;Roxana Mehran;Antonio Colombo

  • Contrast-Induced nephropathy after percutaneous coronary interventions in relation to chronic kidney disease and hemodynamic variables

    George Dangas;Ioannis Iakovou;Eugenia Nikolsky;Eve D. Aymong

  • Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in High-Risk Patients

    Craig R. Smith;Martin B. Leon;Michael J. Mack;D. Craig Miller

  • Analysis of 1-year clinical outcomes in the SIRIUS trial: a randomized trial of a sirolimus-eluting stent versus a standard stent in patients at high risk for coronary restenosis.

    David R. Holmes;Martin B. Leon;Jeffrey W. Moses;Jeffrey J. Popma

Frequent Co-Authors

Martin B. Leon
Martin B. Leon Columbia University Medical Center
Gregg W. Stone
Gregg W. Stone Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
Roxana Mehran
Roxana Mehran Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
Ajay J. Kirtane
Ajay J. Kirtane Columbia University
George Dangas
George Dangas Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
Gary S. Mintz
Gary S. Mintz Columbia University Medical Center
Alexandra J. Lansky
Alexandra J. Lansky Yale University
Akiko Maehara
Akiko Maehara Columbia University
Antonio Colombo
Antonio Colombo Humanitas Clinical and Research Center IRCCS
Emmanouil S. Brilakis
Emmanouil S. Brilakis Abbott Northwestern Hospital

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 the medical field but a traditional MD path isn’t the best fit, there are several rewarding alternatives you can pursue online. Many students consider nursing programs without teas for a flexible route into patient care. These programs, which remove common testing barriers like the TEAS or HESI exams, open doors for aspiring nurses from diverse backgrounds.

For those leaning toward the administrative side of healthcare, healthcare administration degree programs delivered online offer tailored coursework in leadership, policy, and operations—skills vital for running today’s medical facilities.

Registered Nurses looking to advance their careers can benefit from rn to fnp programs. These bridge programs allow current RNs to take on advanced clinical roles as Family Nurse Practitioners, increasing earning potential and scope of practice.

Finally, if nutrition and wellness intrigue you, consider the flexibility of online nutrition degree programs. These degrees can lead to careers in dietetics, research, public health, or wellness coaching—all critical as preventive care shapes the future of medicine.

Best Scientists Citing Jeffrey W. Moses

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles