World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 79 17439 16387 8728 8064 284 26637

Michael J. Lynn publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Michael J. Lynn between 1976 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Michael J. Lynn published across 50 years, from 1976 to 2025, averaging 8.2 papers a year. Output peaked at 37 publications in 2015. 8 of the 410 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1976 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 37. Peak 37 publications in 2015. 1976: 1 publication 1977: 0 publications 1978: 0 publications 1979: 1 publication 1980: 1 publication 1981: 4 publications 1982: 0 publications 1983: 3 publications 1984: 3 publications 1985: 4 publications 1986: 4 publications 1987: 8 publications 1988: 4 publications 1989: 7 publications 1990: 5 publications 1991: 4 publications 1992: 6 publications 1993: 5 publications 1994: 5 publications 1995: 2 publications 1996: 11 publications 1997: 8 publications 1998: 7 publications 1999: 6 publications 2000: 10 publications 2001: 4 publications 2002: 10 publications 2003: 12 publications 2004: 7 publications 2005: 6 publications 2006: 16 publications 2007: 12 publications 2008: 17 publications 2009: 11 publications 2010: 7 publications 2011: 16 publications 2012: 23 publications 2013: 24 publications 2014: 29 publications 2015: 37 publications 2016: 17 publications 2017: 15 publications 2018: 6 publications 2019: 5 publications 2020: 4 publications 2021: 5 publications 2022: 5 publications 2023: 5 publications 2024: 4 publications 2025: 4 publications
1976 2025

410 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Michael J. Lynn: publications per year, 1976 to 2025
Year Publications
1976 1
1977 0
1978 0
1979 1
1980 1
1981 4
1982 0
1983 3
1984 3
1985 4
1986 4
1987 8
1988 4
1989 7
1990 5
1991 4
1992 6
1993 5
1994 5
1995 2
1996 11
1997 8
1998 7
1999 6
2000 10
2001 4
2002 10
2003 12
2004 7
2005 6
2006 16
2007 12
2008 17
2009 11
2010 7
2011 16
2012 23
2013 24
2014 29
2015 37
2016 17
2017 15
2018 6
2019 5
2020 4
2021 5
2022 5
2023 5
2024 4
2025 4
Total 410
Download as CSV

Michael J. Lynn 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. Lynn 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, 281–300 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: 284 publications — 14th percentile

14% 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
281–300 768 284
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
1,641–1,660 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 J. Lynn 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. Lynn 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, 78–79 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: 79 D-Index — 14th percentile

14% 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 79
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
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

Overview

What is he best known for?

The fields of study he is best known for:

  • Internal medicine
  • Surgery
  • Ophthalmology

Michael J. Lynn mainly investigates Surgery, Ophthalmology, Stroke, Visual acuity and Randomized controlled trial. His Surgery study incorporates themes from Visual field and Risk factor. His Stroke research includes elements of Arterial stenosis, Stenosis, Cardiology and Aspirin.

His Visual acuity study combines topics in areas such as Veterans Affairs and Cataract surgery. His study in Randomized controlled trial is interdisciplinary in nature, drawing from both Platelet aggregation inhibitor, Percutaneous and Angioplasty. The various areas that Michael J. Lynn examines in his Radial keratotomy study include Dioptre and Glare.

His most cited work include:

  • Comparison of warfarin and aspirin for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis (1198 citations)
  • Stenting versus Aggressive Medical Therapy for Intracranial Arterial Stenosis (1076 citations)
  • A Standardized Method for Measuring Intracranial Arterial Stenosis (574 citations)

What are the main themes of his work throughout his whole career to date?

His main research concerns Surgery, Ophthalmology, Stroke, Internal medicine and Visual acuity. Michael J. Lynn has researched Surgery in several fields, including Arterial stenosis and Glaucoma. His work carried out in the field of Stroke brings together such families of science as Clinical endpoint, Stenosis, Hazard ratio, Aspirin and Risk factor.

His research in Stenosis intersects with topics in Platelet aggregation inhibitor, Hemodynamics and Angiography. His work in Internal medicine addresses issues such as Cardiology, which are connected to fields such as Cerebral infarction. Michael J. Lynn interconnects Optometry and Prospective cohort study in the investigation of issues within Visual acuity.

He most often published in these fields:

  • Surgery (41.67%)
  • Ophthalmology (30.80%)
  • Stroke (26.81%)

What were the highlights of his more recent work (between 2014-2019)?

  • Stroke (26.81%)
  • Surgery (41.67%)
  • Aphakia (16.30%)

In recent papers he was focusing on the following fields of study:

His primary areas of investigation include Stroke, Surgery, Aphakia, Ophthalmology and Internal medicine. His Stroke research integrates issues from Artery, Clinical endpoint, Stenosis, Vascular disease and Hazard ratio. His research integrates issues of Endothelial stem cell, Arterial stenosis and Confidence interval in his study of Surgery.

His Aphakia research is multidisciplinary, relying on both Treatment study, Dioptre, Glaucoma and Strabismus. The Ophthalmology study which covers Optometry that intersects with Baseline characteristics and Pupil. His work is dedicated to discovering how Internal medicine, Cardiology are connected with Cerebral infarction and Intracranial stenosis and other disciplines.

Between 2014 and 2019, his most popular works were:

  • Glaucoma-Related Adverse Events in the First 5 Years After Unilateral Cataract Removal in the Infant Aphakia Treatment Study. (90 citations)
  • Comparison Among Methods of Retinopathy Assessment (CAMRA) Study: Smartphone, Nonmydriatic, and Mydriatic Photography. (52 citations)
  • Glaucoma Drainage Devices: Risk of Exposure and Infection (37 citations)

In his most recent research, the most cited papers focused on:

  • Internal medicine
  • Surgery
  • Ophthalmology

Michael J. Lynn mainly focuses on Ophthalmology, Surgery, Aphakia, Visual acuity and Intraocular lens. The concepts of his Ophthalmology study are interwoven with issues in Tomography and Slit. His studies deal with areas such as Confidence interval, Hazard ratio, Stroke and Glaucoma as well as Surgery.

His Confidence interval research includes themes of Emmetropia, Refractive error, Log-rank test, Stickler syndrome and Aspirin. Michael J. Lynn works mostly in the field of Aphakia, limiting it down to topics relating to Dioptre and, in certain cases, Cohort, Keratometer and Astigmatism. His Visual acuity research incorporates elements of Contact lens, Cataracts and Cataract surgery.

Best Publications

  • Comparison of warfarin and aspirin for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis

    Marc I. Chimowitz;Michael J. Lynn;Harriet Howlett-Smith;Barney J. Stern

  • Stenting versus Aggressive Medical Therapy for Intracranial Arterial Stenosis

    Marc I. Chimowitz;Michael J. Lynn;Colin P. Derdeyn;Tanya N. Turan

  • A Standardized Method for Measuring Intracranial Arterial Stenosis

    Owen B. Samuels;Gregg J. Joseph;Michael J. Lynn;Harriet A. Smith

  • Predictors of Ischemic Stroke in the Territory of a Symptomatic Intracranial Arterial Stenosis

    Scott E. Kasner;Marc I. Chimowitz;Michael J. Lynn;Harriet Howlett-Smith

  • Risk assessment for ectasia after corneal refractive surgery.

    J. Bradley Randleman;Maria Woodward;Michael J. Lynn;R. Doyle Stulting

  • Aggressive Medical Treatment With or Without Stenting in High-Risk Patients With Intracranial Artery Stenosis (Sammpris): The Final Results of a Randomised Trial

    Colin P. Derdeyn;Marc I. Chimowitz;Michael J. Lynn;David Fiorella

  • Redox state of glutathione in human plasma

    Dean P Jones;Joanne L Carlson;Vino C Mody;Jiyang Cai

  • Redox analysis of human plasma allows separation of pro-oxidant events of aging from decline in antioxidant defenses.

    Dean P Jones;Vino C Mody;Joanne L Carlson;Michael J Lynn

  • Results of the prospective evaluation of radial keratotomy (PERK) study 10 years after surgery.

    George O. Waring;Michael J. Lynn;Peter J. McDonnell

  • Review of corneal endothelial specular microscopy for FDA clinical trials of refractive procedures, surgical devices, and new intraocular drugs and solutions.

    Bernard E McCarey;Henry F Edelhauser;Michael J Lynn

  • The NIH registry on use of the Wingspan stent for symptomatic 70-99% intracranial arterial stenosis.

    O. O. Zaidat;Richard P. Klucznik;M. J. Alexander;J. Chaloupka

  • Collaterals dramatically alter stroke risk in intracranial atherosclerosis.

    David S. Liebeskind;George A. Cotsonis;Jeffrey L. Saver;Michael J. Lynn

  • Natural history of homonymous hemianopia

    X. Zhang;Sachin Kedar;M. J. Lynn;N. J. Newman

  • Results of the Prospective Evaluation of Radial Keratotomy (PERK) Study One Year After Surgery

    George O. Waring;Michael J. Lynn;Henry Gelender;Peter R. Laibson

  • Homonymous hemianopias: clinical-anatomic correlations in 904 cases

    X. Zhang;S. Kedar;M.J. Lynn;N.J. Newman

  • The resident surgeon phacoemulsification learning curve.

    J. Bradley Randleman;Jeremy D. Wolfe;Maria Woodward;Michael J. Lynn

  • Homonymous hemianopia in stroke

    Xiaojun Zhang;Sachin Kedar;Michael J Lynn;Nancy J Newman

  • Oxidation of glutathione and cysteine in human plasma associated with smoking.

    Siobhan E. Moriarty;Jheel H. Shah;Michael Lynn;Shunai Jiang

  • A Class of Biased Estimators in Linear Regression

    R. R. Hocking;F. M. Speed;M. J. Lynn

  • Comparison of contact lens and intraocular lens correction of monocular aphakia during infancy: a randomized clinical trial of HOTV optotype acuity at age 4.5 years and clinical findings at age 5 years.

    Scott R. Lambert;Michael J. Lynn;E. Eugenie Hartmann;Lindreth DuBois

Frequent Co-Authors

David Fiorella
David Fiorella Stony Brook University
Colin P. Derdeyn
Colin P. Derdeyn University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics
David S. Liebeskind
David S. Liebeskind University of California, Los Angeles
Harry J. Cloft
Harry J. Cloft Mayo Clinic
Nancy J. Newman
Nancy J. Newman Emory University
George O. Waring
George O. Waring Clemson University
Scott E. Kasner
Scott E. Kasner University of Pennsylvania
Valérie Biousse
Valérie Biousse Emory University
Dean P. Jones
Dean P. Jones Emory University
Michael Kutner
Michael Kutner Emory 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

There are many affordable and flexible online options for those interested in pursuing a healthcare career beyond traditional medical school. Students can start with specialized programs like a low cost medical coding and billing online program, which can prepare graduates for entry-level roles in healthcare administration and information management.

For those aiming for a clinical pathway, there are several choices for nursing education. Prospective nurses often ask, what is the cheapest online college for nursing? Affordable online nursing degree programs allow students to earn an RN or BSN while balancing work or family responsibilities. Those who wish to advance their careers can consider the cheapest online nurse practitioner programs, preparing nurses for more responsibility and higher income potential.

For experienced nurses seeking leadership or academic roles, pursuing phd nursing education online offers the flexibility of remote learning while opening pathways in research, teaching, and administration. These diverse online degree options help make healthcare education more accessible and affordable across multiple career levels.

Best Scientists Citing Michael J. Lynn

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles