World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking National Ranking Publications Citations
Microbiology 96 521 241 378 29153
Medicine 97 9405 4850 409 29780

Julius Schachter publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Julius Schachter between 1966 and 2021, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Julius Schachter published across 56 years, from 1966 to 2021, averaging 7.3 papers a year. Output peaked at 19 publications in 1987. 4 of the 409 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1966 to 2021. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 19. Peak 19 publications in 1987. 1966: 1 publication 1967: 7 publications 1968: 1 publication 1969: 5 publications 1970: 8 publications 1971: 3 publications 1972: 0 publications 1973: 2 publications 1974: 2 publications 1975: 7 publications 1976: 2 publications 1977: 3 publications 1978: 8 publications 1979: 7 publications 1980: 6 publications 1981: 13 publications 1982: 14 publications 1983: 18 publications 1984: 14 publications 1985: 12 publications 1986: 15 publications 1987: 19 publications 1988: 9 publications 1989: 15 publications 1990: 12 publications 1991: 12 publications 1992: 12 publications 1993: 9 publications 1994: 8 publications 1995: 13 publications 1996: 9 publications 1997: 8 publications 1998: 7 publications 1999: 10 publications 2000: 10 publications 2001: 13 publications 2002: 10 publications 2003: 9 publications 2004: 4 publications 2005: 11 publications 2006: 9 publications 2007: 8 publications 2008: 5 publications 2009: 4 publications 2010: 2 publications 2011: 4 publications 2012: 4 publications 2013: 6 publications 2014: 3 publications 2015: 4 publications 2016: 3 publications 2017: 2 publications 2018: 0 publications 2019: 3 publications 2020: 3 publications 2021: 1 publication
1966 2021

409 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Julius Schachter: publications per year, 1966 to 2021
Year Publications
1966 1
1967 7
1968 1
1969 5
1970 8
1971 3
1972 0
1973 2
1974 2
1975 7
1976 2
1977 3
1978 8
1979 7
1980 6
1981 13
1982 14
1983 18
1984 14
1985 12
1986 15
1987 19
1988 9
1989 15
1990 12
1991 12
1992 12
1993 9
1994 8
1995 13
1996 9
1997 8
1998 7
1999 10
2000 10
2001 13
2002 10
2003 9
2004 4
2005 11
2006 9
2007 8
2008 5
2009 4
2010 2
2011 4
2012 4
2013 6
2014 3
2015 4
2016 3
2017 2
2018 0
2019 3
2020 3
2021 1
Total 409
Download as CSV

Julius Schachter publication distribution in Microbiology in 2026

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

No. of scientists
50 100 150 200 250
Bar chart with 64 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 55–64 to 679+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 288. Most scientists, 288, have 135–144 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 679 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 375–384 publications, is where this scientist sits. 55–64 publications: 8 scientists 65–74 publications: 29 scientists 75–84 publications: 55 scientists 85–94 publications: 112 scientists 95–104 publications: 137 scientists 105–114 publications: 190 scientists 115–124 publications: 235 scientists 125–134 publications: 234 scientists 135–144 publications: 288 scientists 145–154 publications: 265 scientists 155–164 publications: 264 scientists 165–174 publications: 253 scientists 175–184 publications: 276 scientists 185–194 publications: 190 scientists 195–204 publications: 234 scientists 205–214 publications: 208 scientists 215–224 publications: 198 scientists 225–234 publications: 155 scientists 235–244 publications: 161 scientists 245–254 publications: 160 scientists 255–264 publications: 146 scientists 265–274 publications: 139 scientists 275–284 publications: 148 scientists 285–294 publications: 115 scientists 295–304 publications: 96 scientists 305–314 publications: 88 scientists 315–324 publications: 106 scientists 325–334 publications: 65 scientists 335–344 publications: 76 scientists 345–354 publications: 64 scientists 355–364 publications: 62 scientists 365–374 publications: 65 scientists 375–384 publications: 61 scientists 385–394 publications: 34 scientists 395–404 publications: 44 scientists 405–414 publications: 36 scientists 415–424 publications: 35 scientists 425–434 publications: 29 scientists 435–444 publications: 33 scientists 445–454 publications: 34 scientists 455–464 publications: 25 scientists 465–474 publications: 26 scientists 475–484 publications: 20 scientists 485–494 publications: 19 scientists 495–504 publications: 16 scientists 505–514 publications: 17 scientists 515–524 publications: 23 scientists 525–534 publications: 14 scientists 535–544 publications: 14 scientists 545–554 publications: 18 scientists 555–564 publications: 12 scientists 565–574 publications: 7 scientists 575–584 publications: 9 scientists 585–594 publications: 9 scientists 595–604 publications: 9 scientists 605–614 publications: 7 scientists 615–624 publications: 9 scientists 625–634 publications: 7 scientists 635–644 publications: 4 scientists 645–654 publications: 5 scientists 655–664 publications: 6 scientists 665–674 publications: 7 scientists 675–678 publications: 3 scientists 679+ publications: 99 scientists
55–64 publications 679+

This scientist: 378 publications — 88th percentile

88% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 679 publications or more.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Microbiology scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 5,513 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
55–64 8
65–74 29
75–84 55
85–94 112
95–104 137
105–114 190
115–124 235
125–134 234
135–144 288
145–154 265
155–164 264
165–174 253
175–184 276
185–194 190
195–204 234
205–214 208
215–224 198
225–234 155
235–244 161
245–254 160
255–264 146
265–274 139
275–284 148
285–294 115
295–304 96
305–314 88
315–324 106
325–334 65
335–344 76
345–354 64
355–364 62
365–374 65
375–384 61 378
385–394 34
395–404 44
405–414 36
415–424 35
425–434 29
435–444 33
445–454 34
455–464 25
465–474 26
475–484 20
485–494 19
495–504 16
505–514 17
515–524 23
525–534 14
535–544 14
545–554 18
555–564 12
565–574 7
575–584 9
585–594 9
595–604 9
605–614 7
615–624 9
625–634 7
635–644 4
645–654 5
655–664 6
665–674 7
675–678 3
679+ 99
Download as CSV

Julius Schachter D-index placement in Microbiology in 2026

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

No. of scientists
50 100 150
Bar chart with 88 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 40 to 127+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 162. Most scientists, 162, have 58 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 127 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 96 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 40 D-Index: 30 scientists 41 D-Index: 86 scientists 42 D-Index: 90 scientists 43 D-Index: 117 scientists 44 D-Index: 122 scientists 45 D-Index: 123 scientists 46 D-Index: 108 scientists 47 D-Index: 110 scientists 48 D-Index: 106 scientists 49 D-Index: 109 scientists 50 D-Index: 129 scientists 51 D-Index: 111 scientists 52 D-Index: 116 scientists 53 D-Index: 127 scientists 54 D-Index: 134 scientists 55 D-Index: 134 scientists 56 D-Index: 112 scientists 57 D-Index: 136 scientists 58 D-Index: 162 scientists 59 D-Index: 151 scientists 60 D-Index: 139 scientists 61 D-Index: 123 scientists 62 D-Index: 126 scientists 63 D-Index: 144 scientists 64 D-Index: 109 scientists 65 D-Index: 103 scientists 66 D-Index: 124 scientists 67 D-Index: 112 scientists 68 D-Index: 103 scientists 69 D-Index: 131 scientists 70 D-Index: 94 scientists 71 D-Index: 93 scientists 72 D-Index: 96 scientists 73 D-Index: 92 scientists 74 D-Index: 80 scientists 75 D-Index: 66 scientists 76 D-Index: 87 scientists 77 D-Index: 60 scientists 78 D-Index: 73 scientists 79 D-Index: 59 scientists 80 D-Index: 57 scientists 81 D-Index: 55 scientists 82 D-Index: 47 scientists 83 D-Index: 77 scientists 84 D-Index: 50 scientists 85 D-Index: 45 scientists 86 D-Index: 42 scientists 87 D-Index: 41 scientists 88 D-Index: 32 scientists 89 D-Index: 38 scientists 90 D-Index: 35 scientists 91 D-Index: 34 scientists 92 D-Index: 27 scientists 93 D-Index: 26 scientists 94 D-Index: 33 scientists 95 D-Index: 22 scientists 96 D-Index: 37 scientists 97 D-Index: 22 scientists 98 D-Index: 21 scientists 99 D-Index: 22 scientists 100 D-Index: 30 scientists 101 D-Index: 16 scientists 102 D-Index: 20 scientists 103 D-Index: 17 scientists 104 D-Index: 19 scientists 105 D-Index: 16 scientists 106 D-Index: 19 scientists 107 D-Index: 18 scientists 108 D-Index: 14 scientists 109 D-Index: 10 scientists 110 D-Index: 9 scientists 111 D-Index: 7 scientists 112 D-Index: 11 scientists 113 D-Index: 6 scientists 114 D-Index: 15 scientists 115 D-Index: 10 scientists 116 D-Index: 12 scientists 117 D-Index: 7 scientists 118 D-Index: 10 scientists 119 D-Index: 10 scientists 120 D-Index: 11 scientists 121 D-Index: 2 scientists 122 D-Index: 7 scientists 123 D-Index: 12 scientists 124 D-Index: 5 scientists 125 D-Index: 9 scientists 126 D-Index: 6 scientists 127+ D-Index: 95 scientists
40 D-Index 127+

This scientist: 96 D-Index — 91st percentile

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

The last bar groups every scientist with 127 D-Index or more.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Microbiology scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 5,513 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
40 30
41 86
42 90
43 117
44 122
45 123
46 108
47 110
48 106
49 109
50 129
51 111
52 116
53 127
54 134
55 134
56 112
57 136
58 162
59 151
60 139
61 123
62 126
63 144
64 109
65 103
66 124
67 112
68 103
69 131
70 94
71 93
72 96
73 92
74 80
75 66
76 87
77 60
78 73
79 59
80 57
81 55
82 47
83 77
84 50
85 45
86 42
87 41
88 32
89 38
90 35
91 34
92 27
93 26
94 33
95 22
96 37 96
97 22
98 21
99 22
100 30
101 16
102 20
103 17
104 19
105 16
106 19
107 18
108 14
109 10
110 9
111 7
112 11
113 6
114 15
115 10
116 12
117 7
118 10
119 10
120 11
121 2
122 7
123 12
124 5
125 9
126 6
127+ 95
Download as CSV

Overview

Julius Schachter was affiliated with the University of California, San Francisco in the United States. Their research primarily focused on topics related to reproductive tract infections research, syphilis diagnosis and treatment, pediatric health and respiratory diseases, and urinary tract infections management.

Their main fields of study included medicine and immunology and microbiology. Subfields encompassed microbiology, physiology, emergency medical services, and epidemiology.

Among their recent papers were:

  • Ocular Chlamydia trachomatis infection and infectious load among pre-school aged children within trachoma hyperendemic districts receiving the SAFE strategy, Amhara region, Ethiopia (2020) published in PLoS neglected tropical diseases
  • Precision of the Abbott RealTime Assay in the Detection of Ocular Chlamydia trachomatis in a Trachoma-Endemic Area of Ethiopia (2020) published in American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
  • From the NIH: Proceedings of a Workshop on the Importance of Self-Obtained Vaginal Specimens for Detection of Sexually Transmitted Infections (2020) published in UNC Libraries

Frequent coauthors during their research activities included Scott D. Nash, Ambahun Chernet, Jeanne Moncada, Melsew Chanyalew, and Thomas M. Lietman.

The scientist had publications in several venues, notably:

  • PLoS neglected tropical diseases
  • American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
  • UNC Libraries

Best Publications

  • Purification and partial characterization of the major outer membrane protein of Chlamydia trachomatis

    Unknown

  • Recommendations for the Laboratory-Based Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae — 2014

    John R. Papp;Julius Schachter;Charlotte A. Gaydos;Barbara Van Der Pol

  • Chlamydial infections (first of three parts).

    Julius Schachter

  • Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis genitourinary infection in women by ligase chain reaction assay of urine

    H H Lee;M A Chernesky;J Schachter;J D Burczak

  • Multicenter Evaluation of the BDProbeTec ET System for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in Urine Specimens, Female Endocervical Swabs, and Male Urethral Swabs

    Barbara Van Der Pol;Dennis V. Ferrero;Linda Buck-Barrington;Edward Hook

  • Polymorphisms in Chlamydia trachomatis tryptophan synthase genes differentiate between genital and ocular isolates

    Harlan D. Caldwell;Heidi Wood;Debbie Crane;Robin Bailey

  • Prospective study of perinatal transmission of Chlamydia trachomatis

    Julius Schachter;Moses Grossman;Richard L. Sweet;Jane Holt

  • Infection and Disease Epidemiology

    Julius Schachter

  • Persistent Infection with Chlamydia pneumoniae following Acute Respiratory Illness

    Margaret R. Hammerschlag;Keith Chirgwin;Patricia M. Roblin;Maureen Gelling

  • Human chlamydial infections

    Julius Schachter;Chandler R. Dawson

  • Chlamydial infections (third of three parts).

    Julius Schachter

  • The Association of Chlamydia pneumoniae Infection and Reactive Airway Disease in Children

    Umit Emre;Patricia M. Roblin;Maureen Gelling;Wilson Dumornay

  • Azithromycin in control of trachoma.

    Julius Schachter;Sheila K. West;David Mabey;Chandler R. Dawson

  • Nucleic acid amplification tests in the diagnosis of chlamydial and gonococcal infections of the oropharynx and rectum in men who have sex with men.

    Julius Schachter;Jeanne Moncada;Sally Liska;Clara Shayevich

  • Vaginal swabs are the specimens of choice when screening for Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae: results from a multicenter evaluation of the APTIMA assays for both infections.

    Julius Schachter;Max A. Chernesky;Dean E. Willis;Paul M. Fine

  • Performance of the APTIMA Combo 2 assay for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in female urine and endocervical swab specimens.

    C. A. Gaydos;T. C. Quinn;T. C. Quinn;D. Willis;A. Weissfeld

  • Chlamydia trachomatis infection and pregnancy outcome

    RL Sweet;DV Landers;C Walker;J Schachter

  • Ligase chain reaction to detect Chlamydia trachomatis infection of the cervix.

    J Schachter;W E Stamm;T C Quinn;W W Andrews

  • Prevalence of Asymptomatic Nasopharyngeal Carriage of Chlamydia pneumoniae in Subjectively Healthy Adults: Assessment by Polymerase Chain Reaction-Enzyme Immunoassay and Culture

    Charles L. Hyman;Patricia M. Roblin;Patricia M. Roblin;Charlotte A. Gaydos;Thomas C. Quinn

  • Incentivising safe sex: a randomised trial of conditional cash transfers for HIV and sexually transmitted infection prevention in rural Tanzania

    Damien B. C. M. De Walque;William H Dow;Rose Nathan;Ramadhani Abdul

  • Plasma cell endometritis in women with symptomatic bacterial vaginosis.

    Abner P. Korn;Gail Bolan;Nancy Padian;Marilyn Ohm-Smith

Frequent Co-Authors

Max Chernesky
Max Chernesky McMaster University
Thomas C. Quinn
Thomas C. Quinn Johns Hopkins University
Thomas M. Lietman
Thomas M. Lietman University of California, San Francisco
Edward W. Hook
Edward W. Hook University of Alabama at Birmingham
David H. Martin
David H. Martin Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans
Walter E. Stamm
Walter E. Stamm University of Washington
Charlotte A. Gaydos
Charlotte A. Gaydos Johns Hopkins University
Richard S. Stephens
Richard S. Stephens University of California, Berkeley
James B. Mahony
James B. Mahony McMaster University
Nancy Padian
Nancy Padian University of California, Berkeley

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

Studying Microbiology opens doors to diverse career paths beyond traditional lab roles. For those interested in healthcare administration, pursuing an online health information management degree programs cahiim accredited offers a strong foundation in managing patient data and health records systems. These programs equip graduates with key skills needed in hospitals and public health organizations.

If you want to specialize in medical documentation and billing, consider looking into the fastest online medical billing and coding certificate programs. These certificates provide a quick pathway into the healthcare sector, focusing on accuracy and compliance in processing medical claims.

Microbiology graduates exploring advanced clinical roles may also want to explore medical degrees online that pay well. These programs often combine flexibility with strong career prospects, particularly in emerging healthcare fields.

For those with a passion for public health, enrolling in the best easiest mph online programs to get into can be an accessible step toward leadership roles in epidemiology, health policy, and disease prevention—areas closely related to microbiology.

Best Scientists Citing Julius Schachter

Recently Published Articles