World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
96
Citations
41074
World Ranking
9547
National Ranking
4919

Mark Haas 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 Mark Haas 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: 269 publications — 11th percentile

11% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Mark Haas 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 Mark Haas 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: 96 D-Index — 53rd percentile

53% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Mark Haas is affiliated with Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in the United States and has made significant contributions to the field of Medicine, particularly in the subfields of Nephrology, Transplantation, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, Immunology, and Surgery.

Their research primarily addresses key areas such as Renal Diseases and Glomerulopathies, Renal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments, Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes, Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes, Vasculitis and related conditions, Transplantation: Methods and Outcomes, and Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Research.

Among recent papers authored or co-authored by Mark Haas are:

  • The Banff 2019 Kidney Meeting Report (I): Updates on and clarification of criteria for T cell- and antibody-mediated rejection, 2020, American Journal of Transplantation
  • Banff 2019 Meeting Report: Molecular diagnostics in solid organ transplantation-Consensus for the Banff Human Organ Transplant (B-HOT) gene panel and open source multicenter validation, 2020, American Journal of Transplantation
  • The Banff 2022 Kidney Meeting Report: Reappraisal of microvascular inflammation and the role of biopsy-based transcript diagnostics, 2023, American Journal of Transplantation
  • Thirty years of the International Banff Classification for Allograft Pathology: the past, present, and future of kidney transplant diagnostics, 2021, Kidney International
  • Mayo Clinic consensus report on membranous nephropathy: proposal for a novel classification, 2023, Kidney International

Frequent co-authors who have collaborated with Haas include:

  • Alexandre Loupy
  • Agnes B. Fogo
  • Sanjeev Sethi
  • Michael Mengel
  • Maarten Naesens

The scientist's work has been published in several key venues, with notable numbers of publications in:

  • Kidney International
  • Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
  • Kidney International Reports
  • American Journal of Transplantation
  • Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation

Best Publications

  • Banff 07 Classification of Renal Allograft Pathology: Updates and Future Directions

    K. Solez;R. B. Colvin;L. C. Racusen;M. Haas

  • Pathologic Classification of Diabetic Nephropathy

    Thijs W. Cohen Tervaert;Antien L. Mooyaart;Kerstin Amann;Arthur H. Cohen

  • VEGF inhibition and renal thrombotic microangiopathy.

    Vera Eremina;J. Ashley Jefferson;Jolanta Kowalewska;Howard Hochster

  • Banff '05 Meeting Report: differential diagnosis of chronic allograft injury and elimination of chronic allograft nephropathy ('CAN').

    K. Solez;R. B. Colvin;L. C. Racusen;B. Sis

  • Banff 2013 meeting report: inclusion of c4d-negative antibody-mediated rejection and antibody-associated arterial lesions

    M. Haas;B. Sis;L. C. Racusen;K. Solez

  • The Oxford classification of IgA nephropathy: Rationale, clinicopathological correlations, and classification

    Daniel C. Cattran;Rosanna Coppo;H. Terence Cook;John Feehally

  • The Banff 2017 Kidney Meeting Report: Revised diagnostic criteria for chronic active T cell-mediated rejection, antibody-mediated rejection, and prospects for integrative endpoints for next-generation clinical trials

    M. Haas;A. Loupy;C. Lefaucheur;C. Roufosse

  • The Oxford classification of IgA nephropathy: pathology definitions, correlations, and reproducibility

    Ian S.D. Roberts;H. Terence Cook;Stéphan Troyanov;Charles E. Alpers

  • Oxford Classification of IgA nephropathy 2016: an update from the IgA Nephropathy Classification Working Group

    Hernán Trimarchi;Jonathan Barratt;Daniel C. Cattran;H. Terence Cook

  • Banff '09 meeting report: Antibody mediated graft deterioration and implementation of Banff working groups

    B. Sis;M. Mengel;M. Haas;R. B. Colvin

  • Revision of the International Society of Nephrology/Renal Pathology Society classification for lupus nephritis: clarification of definitions, and modified National Institutes of Health activity and chronicity indices

    Ingeborg M. Bajema;Suzanne Wilhelmus;Charles E. Alpers;Jan A. Bruijn

  • The Banff 2019 Kidney Meeting Report (I): updates on and clarification of criteria for T cell- and antibody-mediated rejection

    Alexandre Loupy;Mark Haas;Candice Roufosse;Maarten Naesens

  • C3 glomerulopathy: consensus report

    Matthew C. Pickering;Vivette D. D'agati;Carla M. Nester;Richard J. Smith

  • The Banff 2015 Kidney Meeting Report: Current Challenges in Rejection Classification and Prospects for Adopting Molecular Pathology.

    A. Loupy;M. Haas;K. Solez;L. Racusen

  • A 2018 Reference Guide to the Banff Classification of Renal Allograft Pathology.

    Candice Roufosse;Naomi Simmonds;Marian Clahsen-van Groningen;Mark Haas

  • Histologic subclassification of IgA nephropathy: A clinicopathologic study of 244 cases

    Mark Haas

  • Changing etiologies of unexplained adult nephrotic syndrome: a comparison of renal biopsy findings from 1976-1979 and 1995-1997.

    Mark Haas;Shane M. Meehan;Theodore G. Karrison;Benjamin H. Spargo

  • The Na-K-Cl Cotransporter of Secretory Epithelia

    Mark Haas;Bliss Forbush

  • Banff 2011 Meeting Report: New Concepts in Antibody‐Mediated Rejection

    M. Mengel;B. Sis;M. Haas;R. B. Colvin

  • CJASN Glomerular Disease Education Series: IgA Nephropathy

    Jennifer C. Rodrigues;Mark Haas;Heather N. Reich;Heather N. Reich

Frequent Co-Authors

Richard J. Quigg
Richard J. Quigg University at Buffalo, State University of New York
Robert A. Montgomery
Robert A. Montgomery New York University
Lorraine C. Racusen
Lorraine C. Racusen Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Stanley C. Jordan
Stanley C. Jordan Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
Michael Mengel
Michael Mengel University of Alberta
Agnes B. Fogo
Agnes B. Fogo Vanderbilt University Medical Center
Robert B. Colvin
Robert B. Colvin Harvard University
Andrea A. Zachary
Andrea A. Zachary Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Dorry L. Segev
Dorry L. Segev Johns Hopkins University

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

Interested in expanding your career options beyond a traditional MD? Many students exploring Medicine in the USA also consider flexible online degrees in related fields. For example, healthcare administration degrees are popular for those aiming for leadership or management roles within hospitals or clinics.

If you have a nursing background, there are rn to np programs that allow registered nurses to advance their education and become nurse practitioners, opening doors to higher earning potential and greater clinical responsibilities.

For those passionate about preventive care, an online degree nutrition provides a foundation in dietetics, wellness, and public health, leading to various roles in hospitals, schools, and private practice.

Balancing work and study is important, especially for professionals already working in healthcare. If you’re seeking advancement while maintaining your current job, discover whats the best online mha program for working adults for convenient and accredited options in health administration.

Best Scientists Citing Mark Haas

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles