World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Award Badge
Best Scientists
2025
Award Badge
Medicine
Germany
2026

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Best Scientists 186 480 443 16 16 1709 180268
Medicine 188 269 245 5 5 1637 193999

Michael Böhm publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Michael Böhm between 1984 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Michael Böhm published across 42 years, from 1984 to 2025, averaging 47.8 papers a year. Output peaked at 120 publications in 2023. 94 of the 2,006 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
25 50 75 100
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1984 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 120. Peak 120 publications in 2023. 1984: 1 publication 1985: 4 publications 1986: 1 publication 1987: 2 publications 1988: 9 publications 1989: 13 publications 1990: 19 publications 1991: 10 publications 1992: 23 publications 1993: 16 publications 1994: 21 publications 1995: 19 publications 1996: 22 publications 1997: 16 publications 1998: 38 publications 1999: 15 publications 2000: 26 publications 2001: 18 publications 2002: 46 publications 2003: 55 publications 2004: 37 publications 2005: 37 publications 2006: 57 publications 2007: 64 publications 2008: 81 publications 2009: 77 publications 2010: 73 publications 2011: 81 publications 2012: 87 publications 2013: 95 publications 2014: 95 publications 2015: 92 publications 2016: 64 publications 2017: 60 publications 2018: 69 publications 2019: 74 publications 2020: 93 publications 2021: 99 publications 2022: 83 publications 2023: 120 publications 2024: 58 publications 2025: 36 publications
1984 2025

2,006 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Michael Böhm: publications per year, 1984 to 2025
Year Publications
1984 1
1985 4
1986 1
1987 2
1988 9
1989 13
1990 19
1991 10
1992 23
1993 16
1994 21
1995 19
1996 22
1997 16
1998 38
1999 15
2000 26
2001 18
2002 46
2003 55
2004 37
2005 37
2006 57
2007 64
2008 81
2009 77
2010 73
2011 81
2012 87
2013 95
2014 95
2015 92
2016 64
2017 60
2018 69
2019 74
2020 93
2021 99
2022 83
2023 120
2024 58
2025 36
Total 2,006
Download as CSV

Michael Böhm 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 Michael Böhm 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, 1,621–1,640 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: 1,637 publications — 99th percentile

99% 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
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 1,637
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

Michael Böhm 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 Michael Böhm 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, 188–189 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: 188 D-Index — 99th percentile

99% 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
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 22 188
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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2026 - Research.com Medicine in Germany Leader Award
  • 2025 - Research.com Best Scientists Award
  • 2025 - Research.com Medicine in Germany Leader Award
  • 2023 - Research.com Medicine in Germany Leader Award
  • 2012 - German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina - Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina – Nationale Akademie der Wissenschaften Internal Medicine and Dermatology

Overview

Michael Böhm is affiliated with Saarland University in Germany and has built a substantial body of research in the field of Medicine, with a particular focus on Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine. Their scholarly output includes over a thousand publications, with 568 specifically addressing cardiology and cardiovascular medicine topics.

Their research spans multiple subfields, including Surgery, Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, as well as Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging. This interdisciplinary approach supports a comprehensive exploration of cardiovascular health and related medical areas.

Key topics covered in their work include Heart Failure Treatment and Management, Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies, Cardiovascular Function and Risk Factors, Diabetes Treatment and Management, Cardiac Pacing and Defibrillation Studies, Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control, and Atrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes.

Michael Böhm has published frequently in a range of journals, with the highest number of contributions appearing in:

  • European Journal of Heart Failure
  • Clinical Research in Cardiology
  • European Heart Journal
  • Journal of Hypertension
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Among their recent papers are influential works such as:

  • "2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure" (2021) - European Heart Journal
  • "Cardiovascular and Renal Outcomes with Empagliflozin in Heart Failure" (2020) - New England Journal of Medicine
  • "Empagliflozin in Heart Failure with a Preserved Ejection Fraction" (2021) - New England Journal of Medicine
  • "2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure" (2022) - European Journal of Heart Failure
  • "2023 Focused Update of the 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure" (2023) - European Heart Journal

Michael Böhm has collaborated extensively with several researchers. Frequent co-authors include Felix Mahfoud, Lucas Lauder, Roland E. Schmieder, Piotr Ponikowski, and Stefan D. Anker, reflecting a strong network within cardiovascular research communities.

The scientist's recognition includes membership in the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina, an award received in 2012 in connection with Internal Medicine and Dermatology.

Best Publications

  • 2013 ESH/ESC Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).

    Giuseppe Mancia;Robert Fagard;Krzysztof Narkiewicz;Josep Redon

  • 2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure.

    Theresa A McDonagh;Marco Metra;Marianna Adamo;Roy S Gardner

  • Dapagliflozin in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction

    John J.V. McMurray;Scott D. Solomon;Silvio E. Inzucchi;Lars Køber

  • ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2008: the Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure 2008 of the European Society of Cardiology. Developed in collaboration with the Heart Failure Association of the ESC (HFA) and endorsed by the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM).

    Kenneth Dickstein;Alain Cohen-Solal;Gerasimos Filippatos;John J V McMurray

  • Renal sympathetic denervation in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension (The Symplicity HTN-2 Trial): A randomised controlled trial

    Murray D. Esler;Henry Krum;Paul A. Sobotka;Markus P. Schlaich

  • Ivabradine and outcomes in chronic heart failure (SHIFT): a randomised placebo-controlled study.

    Karl Swedberg;Michel Komajda;Michael Böhm;Jeffrey S Borer

  • Empagliflozin in heart failure with a preserved ejection fraction

    Stefan D Anker;Javed Butler;Gerasimos Filippatos;João P Ferreira

  • Circulating endothelial progenitor cells and cardiovascular outcomes.

    Nikos Werner;Sonja Kosiol;Tobias Schiegl;Patrick Ahlers

  • Intraaortic Balloon Support for Myocardial Infarction with Cardiogenic Shock

    Holger Thiele;Uwe Zeymer;Franz-Josef Neumann;Miroslaw Ferenc

  • Clinical Features and Outcomes of Takotsubo (Stress) Cardiomyopathy

    Christian Templin;Jelena R. Ghadri;Johanna Diekmann;L. Christian Napp

  • Randomized trial to determine the effect of nebivolol on mortality and cardiovascular hospital admission in elderly patients with heart failure (SENIORS)

    Marcus D. Flather;Marcelo C. Shibata;Andrew J.S. Coats;Dirk J. Van Veldhuisen

  • Rosuvastatin in Older Patients with Systolic Heart Failure

    John Kjekshus;Eduard Apetrei;Vivencio Barrios;Michael Böhm

  • 2013 Practice guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC): ESH/ESC Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension.

    Giuseppe Mancia;Robert Fagard;Krzysztof Narkiewicz;Josep Redán

  • Physical Training Increases Endothelial Progenitor Cells, Inhibits Neointima Formation, and Enhances Angiogenesis

    Ulrich Laufs;Nikos Werner;Andreas Link;Matthias Endres

  • Update on myocarditis.

    Ingrid Kindermann;Christine Barth;Felix Mahfoud;Christian Ukena

  • Heart rate as a risk factor in chronic heart failure (SHIFT): the association between heart rate and outcomes in a randomised placebo-controlled trial

    Michael Böhm;Karl Swedberg;Michel Komajda;Jeffrey S Borer

  • Cardiovascular Disease in Chronic Kidney Disease: Pathophysiological Insights and Therapeutic Options.

    Joachim Jankowski;Jürgen Floege;Danilo Fliser;Michael Böhm

  • Treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis with a paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter.

    Bruno Scheller;Christoph Hehrlein;Wolfgang Bocksch;Wolfgang Rutsch

  • Proposal for a revised definition of dilated cardiomyopathy, hypokinetic non-dilated cardiomyopathy, and its implications for clinical practice : a position statement of the ESC working group on myocardial and pericardial diseases

    Yigal M Pinto;Perry M Elliott;Eloisa Arbustini;Yehuda Adler

  • Executive summary of the guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of acute heart failure

    Nieminen Ms;Böhm M;Drexler H

Frequent Co-Authors

Ulrich Laufs
Ulrich Laufs Saarland University
Georg Nickenig
Georg Nickenig University of Bonn
Roland E. Schmieder
Roland E. Schmieder University of Erlangen-Nuremberg
Karl Swedberg
Karl Swedberg University of Gothenburg
Markus P. Schlaich
Markus P. Schlaich University of Western Australia
Luigi Tavazzi
Luigi Tavazzi University of Ferrara
Ian Ford
Ian Ford University of Glasgow
Jeffrey S. Borer
Jeffrey S. Borer SUNY Downstate Medical Center
Thomas F. Lüscher
Thomas F. Lüscher University of Zurich
Faiez Zannad
Faiez Zannad University of Lorraine

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 healthcare careers beyond the traditional MD, the USA offers a variety of flexible online degree pathways. Programs like direct entry msn online enable non-nurses with a bachelor’s degree in another field to fast-track a nursing career through online study.

If you’re seeking an easier route into the nursing profession, several online bsn programs for non nurses can help jumpstart your journey without prior clinical experience. Some students may also prefer schools that reduce entrance barriers, such as nursing schools that don't require teas, simplifying the application process considerably.

Not all healthcare roles require direct patient care. For those interested in the administrative side, medical billing and coding schools that accept fafsa offer accessible, accredited training programs with financial aid options.

Whether your interest is in clinical or non-clinical roles, these online pathways provide alternatives and gateways into the diverse and rewarding field of healthcare in the United States.

Best Scientists Citing Michael Böhm

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles