World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Jens Rassweiler

Jens Rassweiler

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 80 17070 16047 897 864 632 24513

Jens Rassweiler publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Jens Rassweiler between 1980 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Jens Rassweiler published across 46 years, from 1980 to 2025, averaging 15 papers a year. Output peaked at 38 publications in 2008. 27 of the 691 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1980 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 38. Peak 38 publications in 2008. 1980: 1 publication 1981: 2 publications 1982: 1 publication 1983: 0 publications 1984: 5 publications 1985: 8 publications 1986: 8 publications 1987: 6 publications 1988: 11 publications 1989: 5 publications 1990: 8 publications 1991: 5 publications 1992: 10 publications 1993: 13 publications 1994: 15 publications 1995: 5 publications 1996: 9 publications 1997: 8 publications 1998: 10 publications 1999: 13 publications 2000: 8 publications 2001: 14 publications 2002: 15 publications 2003: 12 publications 2004: 7 publications 2005: 30 publications 2006: 33 publications 2007: 23 publications 2008: 38 publications 2009: 29 publications 2010: 20 publications 2011: 20 publications 2012: 33 publications 2013: 32 publications 2014: 26 publications 2015: 33 publications 2016: 34 publications 2017: 29 publications 2018: 22 publications 2019: 14 publications 2020: 16 publications 2021: 19 publications 2022: 5 publications 2023: 9 publications 2024: 12 publications 2025: 15 publications
1980 2025

691 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Jens Rassweiler: publications per year, 1980 to 2025
Year Publications
1980 1
1981 2
1982 1
1983 0
1984 5
1985 8
1986 8
1987 6
1988 11
1989 5
1990 8
1991 5
1992 10
1993 13
1994 15
1995 5
1996 9
1997 8
1998 10
1999 13
2000 8
2001 14
2002 15
2003 12
2004 7
2005 30
2006 33
2007 23
2008 38
2009 29
2010 20
2011 20
2012 33
2013 32
2014 26
2015 33
2016 34
2017 29
2018 22
2019 14
2020 16
2021 19
2022 5
2023 9
2024 12
2025 15
Total 691
Download as CSV

Jens Rassweiler publications per year - data summary

  • Jens Rassweiler, a Medicine scholar from Heidelberg University, has 691 publications recorded across 46 years, from 1980 to 2025.
  • The oldest publication on record dates to 1980 and the most recent to 2025.
  • The most productive year is 2008, with 38 publications.
  • The least productive years with any output are 1980 and 1982, with 1 publication each.
  • 1 of the 46 years in the span carries no publications at all (1983).
  • The rate of publication averages 15.0 papers per year over the whole span, or 15.4 per year counting only the 45 years with at least one publication.
  • The last 5 years on the chart (2021-2025) hold 60 publications, 9% of the career total.
  • Split into equal eras - 1980-1995: 103 publications (6.4 per year); 1996-2011: 289 publications (18.1 per year); 2012-2025: 299 publications (21.4 per year).
  • Comparing the opening and closing eras, the overall trend of publication is rising.

Jens Rassweiler 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 Jens Rassweiler 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, 621–640 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: 632 publications — 75th percentile

75% 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
621–640 386 632
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
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

Jens Rassweiler publication distribution in Medicine in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the publication count of all 20,134 Medicine scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 86 ranges running from 101–120 to 1,796+ publications.
  • Jens Rassweiler, a Medicine scholar from Heidelberg University, records 632 publications - the 75th percentile of the discipline.
  • 75% of ranked Medicine scientists score the same or lower than Jens Rassweiler, and about 25% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 441–460 publications range, and Jens Rassweiler ranks above the median.
  • The most crowded range is 341–360 publications, holding 922 scientists (5% of the field).
  • 64% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 521–540 publications), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more, 100 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

Jens Rassweiler 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 Jens Rassweiler 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, 80–81 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: 80 D-Index — 16th percentile

16% 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 80
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
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

Jens Rassweiler D-index placement in Medicine in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the discipline H-index (D-index) of all 20,134 Medicine scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 75 ranges running from 70–71 to 217+ D-Index.
  • Jens Rassweiler, a Medicine scholar from Heidelberg University, records 80 D-Index - the 16th percentile of the discipline.
  • 16% of ranked Medicine scientists score the same or lower than Jens Rassweiler, and about 84% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 94–95 D-Index range, and Jens Rassweiler ranks below the median.
  • The most crowded range is 82–83 D-Index, holding 1,027 scientists (5% of the field).
  • 70% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 106–107 D-Index), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more, 98 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

Overview

Jens Rassweiler is affiliated with Heidelberg University in Germany and has contributed extensively to the field of medicine, with a primary focus on urology, surgery, and pulmonary and respiratory medicine. Their body of work encompasses a variety of subfields, including pediatrics, perinatology, and obstetrics and gynecology.

The main topics addressed in their research involve:

  • Kidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
  • Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Pediatric Urology and Nephrology Studies
  • Urological Disorders and Treatments
  • Urinary Bladder and Prostate Research
  • Ureteral procedures and complications
  • Bladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments

Jens Rassweiler has authored papers published in a number of respected journals, with frequent contributions in:

  • European Urology
  • World Journal of Urology
  • Der Urologe
  • European Urology Open Science
  • Current Opinion in Urology

Some recent papers featuring Jens Rassweiler as a contributor include:

  • "European Association of Urology Guidelines Office Rapid Reaction Group: An Organisation-wide Collaborative Effort to Adapt the European Association of Urology Guidelines Recommendations to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Era," 2020, European Urology
  • "Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in Prostate Cancer Patient Management-Current Trends and Future Perspectives," 2021, Diagnostics
  • "Effect of Simulation-based Training on Surgical Proficiency and Patient Outcomes: A Randomised Controlled Clinical and Educational Trial," 2021, European Urology
  • "New multiport robotic surgical systems: a comprehensive literature review of clinical outcomes in urology," 2023, Therapeutic Advances in Urology
  • "Best Practices in Robotic-assisted Repair of Vesicovaginal Fistula: A Consensus Report from the European Association of Urology Robotic Urology Section Scientific Working Group for Reconstructive Urology," 2020, European Urology

Their frequent collaborators include:

  • Ali Serdar Gözen
  • Selçuk Güven
  • Marie-Claire Rassweiler-Seyfried
  • Abdüllatif Aydın
  • Kamran Ahmed

Rassweiler's research integrates clinical and technological approaches, reflecting ongoing developments in robotic surgery, machine learning applications in prostate cancer management, and simulation-based surgical training. Their work addresses a range of urological conditions and treatments, underlining an emphasis on improving both diagnostic and therapeutic outcomes in urology and related surgical fields.

Best Publications

  • Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)--incidence, management, and prevention.

    Jens Rassweiler;Dogu Teber;Rainer Kuntz;Rainer Hofmann

  • Retropubic, Laparoscopic, and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Cumulative Analysis of Comparative Studies

    Vincenzo Ficarra;Giacomo Novara;Walter Artibani;Andrea Cestari

  • Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

    Maurice Stephan Michel;Lutz Trojan;Jens Jochen Rassweiler

  • Laparoscopic Versus Open Radical Prostatectomy: A Comparative Study at a Single Institution

    Jens Rassweiler;Othmar Seemann;Michael Schulze;Dogu Teber

  • LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY WITH THE HEILBRONN TECHNIQUE: AN ANALYSIS OF THE FIRST 180 CASES

    Jens Rassweiler;Ludger Sentker;Othmar Seemann;Martin Hatzinger

  • COMPLICATIONS OF LAPAROSCOPIC PROCEDURES IN UROLOGY: EXPERIENCE WITH 2,407 PROCEDURES AT 4 GERMAN CENTERS

    Dirk Fahlenkamp;Jens Rassweiler;Jens Rassweiler;Paolo Fornara;Paolo Fornara;Thomas Frede;Thomas Frede

  • Shock Wave Technology and Application: An Update

    Jens J. Rassweiler;Thomas Knoll;Kai Uwe Köhrmann;James A. McAteer

  • Padeliporfin vascular-targeted photodynamic therapy versus active surveillance in men with low-risk prostate cancer (CLIN1001 PCM301): an open-label, phase 3, randomised controlled trial

    Abdel Rahmène Azzouzi;Sébastien Vincendeau;Eric Barret;Antony Cicco

  • Laparoscopic nephrectomy: the experience of the laparoscopy working group of the German Urologic Association.

    Jens Rassweiler;Paolo Fornara;Mathias Weber;Gunther Janetschek

  • LAPAROSCOPIC PARTIAL NEPHRECTOMY: The European Experience

    Jens J. Rassweiler;Claude Abbou;Günter Janetschek;Klaus Jeschke

  • European Association of Urology Guidelines Office Rapid Reaction Group: An Organisation-wide Collaborative Effort to Adapt the European Association of Urology Guidelines Recommendations to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Era.

    Maria J. Ribal;Philip Cornford;Alberto Briganti;Thomas Knoll

  • Laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma: is it better than open surgery?

    Jens J. Rassweiler;Michael Schulze;Reinaldo Marrero;Thomas Frede

  • Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy--critical analysis of the results.

    Jens Rassweiler;Marcel Hruza;Dogu Teber;Li-Ming Su

  • RETROPERITONEOSCOPY: EXPERIENCE WITH 200 CASES

    Jens J. Rassweiler;Otmar Seemann;Thomas Frede;Thomas O. Henkel

  • Oncological safety of laparoscopic surgery for urological malignancy: experience with more than 1,000 operations.

    Jens Rassweiler;Alexander Tsivian;A.V. Ravi Kumar;Christos Lymberakis

  • Future of robotic surgery in urology.

    Jens J. Rassweiler;Riccardo Autorino;Jan Klein;Alex Mottrie

  • Training in percutaneous nephrolithotomy--a critical review.

    Jean J.M.C.H. de la Rosette;Maria P. Laguna;Jens J. Rassweiler;Pierre Conort

  • Navigation in endoscopic soft tissue surgery: perspectives and limitations.

    Matthias Baumhauer;Marco Feuerstein;Hans Peter Meinzer;J. Rassweiler

  • Ureteral Reimplantation for Management of Ureteral Strictures: A Retrospective Comparison of Laparoscopic and Open Techniques

    Jens J. Rassweiler;Ali S. Gözen;Tibet Erdogru;Marto Sugiono

  • Retroperitoneal and pelvic extraperitoneal laparoscopy: an international perspective

    Inderbir S Gill;Ralph V Clayman;David M Albala;Yoshio Aso

Frequent Co-Authors

Jean J.M.C.H. de la Rosette
Jean J.M.C.H. de la Rosette Istanbul Medipol University
Riccardo Autorino
Riccardo Autorino Virginia Commonwealth University
Hans-Peter Meinzer
Hans-Peter Meinzer German Cancer Research Center
Inderbir S. Gill
Inderbir S. Gill University of Southern California
Francesco Porpiglia
Francesco Porpiglia University of Turin
Glenn M. Preminger
Glenn M. Preminger Duke University
Jihad H. Kaouk
Jihad H. Kaouk Cleveland Clinic
Alexandre de la Taille
Alexandre de la Taille Université Paris Cité
Beat P. Müller-Stich
Beat P. Müller-Stich Heidelberg University
Prokar Dasgupta
Prokar Dasgupta King's College London

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 interested in medical careers outside of or alongside traditional MD training, a range of online nursing programs can open doors in the healthcare field. Many students are drawn to flexible training options that allow them to enter the workforce faster or advance their qualifications while working.

Aspiring nurses can consider accelerated tracks such as a 6 month lpn program, which offers a fast pathway into practical nursing roles. For those aiming at specialized or advanced practice, psych nurse practitioner programs allow you to provide expert mental health care, an area with strong job demand.

For registered nurses seeking top clinical and leadership roles, pursuing accredited online dnp programs can be a strategic move, with options designed for busy professionals. If you value efficiency, you might look into online dnp programs that streamline coursework and residencies.

Taking these online pathways can help you launch or advance a rewarding healthcare career, matching your interests and schedule with a range of roles beyond traditional pre-med routes.

Best Scientists Citing Jens Rassweiler

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles