World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
96
Citations
57511
World Ranking
9475
National Ranking
4890

Michael J. Baum 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 J. Baum 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: 611 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: 720 publications — 82nd percentile

82% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Michael J. Baum 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 J. Baum 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: 400 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.

Research.com Recognitions

  • 1990 - Fellow of the American Psychological Association (APA)

Overview

Michael J. Baum is affiliated with Boston University in the United States. Their professional recognition includes being named a Fellow of the American Psychological Association (APA) in 1990.

Baum's academic profile indicates involvement in psychological research, as reflected in the APA fellowship, but specific details regarding their main fields of study, subfields, or primary research topics have not been documented.

No records of recent papers, frequent co-authors, or publication venues are available for Baum. Likewise, there is no information on books published or detailed topics of work that would provide further insight into their research focus.

This profile presents available factual data without extrapolation beyond the provided information.

Best Publications

  • Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials

    O. Abe;R. Abe;K. Enomoto;K. Kikuchi

  • Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group.

    C Focan;SM Steinberg;M Blichert-Toft;JF Forbes

  • Anastrozole alone or in combination with tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone for adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with early breast cancer: first results of the ATAC randomised trial.

    M Baum;A U Budzar;J Cuzick;J Forbes

  • Results of the ATAC (Arimidex, Tamoxifen, Alone or in Combination) trial after completion of 5 years' adjuvant treatment for breast cancer

    Anthony Howell

  • Effect of anastrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant treatment for early-stage breast cancer: 10-year analysis of the ATAC trial.

    Jack Cuzick;Ivana Sestak;Michael Baum;Aman U Buzdar

  • Anastrozole alone or in combination with tamoxifen versus tamoxifen alone for adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer: results of the ATAC (Arimidex, Tamoxifen Alone or in Combination) trial efficacy and safety update analyses

    M Baum;A Buzdar;J Cuzick;J Forbes

  • Cause-specific mortality in long-term survivors of breast cancer who participated in trials of radiotherapy.

    J Cuzick;H Stewart;L Rutqvist;J Houghton

  • Risk-adapted targeted intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole-breast radiotherapy for breast cancer: 5-year results for local control and overall survival from the TARGIT-A randomised trial

    Jayant S Vaidya;Jayant S Vaidya;Frederik Wenz;Max Bulsara;Jeffrey S Tobias

  • Meta-Analysis of Breast Cancer Outcomes in Adjuvant Trials of Aromatase Inhibitors Versus Tamoxifen

    Mitch Dowsett;Jack Cuzick;Jim Ingle;Alan Coates

  • Prediction of Risk of Distant Recurrence Using the 21-Gene Recurrence Score in Node-Negative and Node-Positive Postmenopausal Patients With Breast Cancer Treated With Anastrozole or Tamoxifen: A TransATAC Study

    Mitch Dowsett;Jack Cuzick;Christopher Wale;John Forbes

  • Targeted intraoperative radiotherapy versus whole breast radiotherapy for breast cancer (TARGIT-A trial): an international, prospective, randomised, non-inferiority phase 3 trial

    Jayant S Vaidya;David J Joseph;Jeffrey S Tobias;Max Bulsara

  • First results from the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study (IBIS-I): a randomised prevention trial.

    J Cuzick;J Forbes;R Edwards;M Baum

  • Induction of Transforming Growth Factor β1 in Human Breast Cancer in Vivo following Tamoxifen Treatment

    Anju Butta;Kenneth MacLennan;Kathleen C. Flanders;Nigel P. M. Sacks

  • Overview of Randomized Trials of Postoperative Adjuvant Radiotherapy in Breast Cancer

    J. Cuzick;H. J. Stewart;R. Peto;M. Baum

  • Differentiation of coital behavior in mammals: A comparative analysis

    Michael J. Baum

  • Increased expression of c-fos in the medial preoptic area after mating in male rats: role of afferent inputs from the medial amygdala and midbrain central tegmental field.

    M.J. Baum;B.J. Everitt

  • Effects of breast conservation on psychological morbidity associated with diagnosis and treatment of early breast cancer.

    L J Fallowfield;M Baum;G P Maguire

  • Copulation in Castrated Male Rats following Combined Treatment with Estradiol and Dihydrotestosterone

    Michael J. Baum;J. T. M. Vreeburg

  • Benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen therapy in primary breast cancer patients according oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, EGF receptor and HER2 status

    M. Dowsett;J. Houghton;C. Iden;J. Salter

  • Retrospective Analysis of Time to Recurrence in the ATAC Trial According to Hormone Receptor Status: An Hypothesis-Generating Study

    Mitch Dowsett;Jack Cuzick;Chris Wale;Tony Howell

Frequent Co-Authors

Stuart A. Tobet
Stuart A. Tobet Colorado State University
Eric B. Keverne
Eric B. Keverne University of Cambridge
Daniel W. Wesson
Daniel W. Wesson University of Florida
Jacques Balthazart
Jacques Balthazart University of Liège
Peter C. Doherty
Peter C. Doherty University of Melbourne
Per Södersten
Per Södersten Karolinska Institute
Michel D. Ferrari
Michel D. Ferrari Leiden University Medical Center
Michael A. Moskowitz
Michael A. Moskowitz Harvard University
Cenk Ayata
Cenk Ayata Harvard University
Virginia E. Papaioannou
Virginia E. Papaioannou Columbia University Medical Center

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

Exploring careers in medicine isn’t limited to becoming a doctor. There are many alternative healthcare pathways you can pursue online, often with greater flexibility and faster entry into the workforce. One popular option is enrolling in medical coding and billing classes online with financial aid, which prepare you for vital roles in healthcare administration supporting patient care and hospital operations.

If patient care is your passion, you might consider applying to a nursing school that don't require teas exams, providing an easier admissions process for prospective nurses. Those seeking leadership roles or looking to progress beyond entry-level positions can benefit from a healthcare administration degree online accredited by recognized institutions, opening doors in management and policy.

For registered nurses aiming to become family nurse practitioners, there are flexible, advanced rn to fnp programs to help you level up your credentials online while continuing to work. These programs and pathways reflect the expanding opportunities to build a future in the U.S. healthcare system—without always taking the traditional route.

Best Scientists Citing Michael J. Baum

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles