World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
150
Citations
109695
World Ranking
1143
National Ranking
658

Michael J. Mack 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. Mack 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: 890 publications — 91st percentile

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

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

Michael J. Mack 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. Mack 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: 150 D-Index — 94th percentile

94% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Michael J. Mack is affiliated with Scott & White Memorial Hospital in the United States. Their primary research field is Medicine, with an extensive focus on Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine.

The subfields in which they have published include Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine, Epidemiology, Surgery, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging, and Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine.

The main topics of their work cover Cardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments, Infective Endocarditis Diagnosis and Management, Cardiovascular Function and Risk Factors, Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics, Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies, Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes, and Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics.

Frequent co-authors in their publications include Martin B. Leon, Vinod H. Thourani, Gregg W. Stone, Samir Kapadia, and JoAnn Lindenfeld.

The most common venues where Michael J. Mack has published are Journal of the American College of Cardiology, JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, European Heart Journal, The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, and Circulation.

Among notable recent papers, the following have been authored or co-authored:

  • 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines (2020), published in Circulation
  • 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines (2020), published in Circulation
  • 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease (2020), published in Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • Valve Academic Research Consortium 3: Updated Endpoint Definitions for Aortic Valve Clinical Research (2021), published in Journal of the American College of Cardiology
  • 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary (2020), published in Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Michael J. Mack has also contributed to book publications, including a title published by Bloomsbury Academic eBooks titled Disappointment released in 2020.

Best Publications

  • Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Severe Coronary Artery Disease

    Patrick W. Serruys;Marie-Claude Morice;A. Pieter Kappetein;Antonio Colombo

  • 2017 AHA/ACC Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines

    Rick A. Nishimura;Catherine M. Otto;Robert O. Bonow;Blase A. Carabello

  • Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Balloon-Expandable Valve in Low-Risk Patients

    Michael J. Mack;Martin B. Leon;Vinod H. Thourani;Raj Makkar

  • 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

    Catherine M. Otto;Rick A. Nishimura;Robert O. Bonow;Blase A. Carabello

  • Transcatheter Mitral-Valve Repair in Patients with Heart Failure.

    Gregg W. Stone;JoAnn Lindenfeld;William T. Abraham;Saibal Kar

  • Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel disease and left main coronary disease : 5-year follow-up of the randomised, clinical SYNTAX trial

    Friedrich W. Mohr;Marie Claude Morice;A. Pieter Kappetein;Ted E. Feldman

  • 2016 ACC/AHA Guideline Focused Update on Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines

    Glenn N. Levine;Eric R. Bates;John A. Bittl;Ralph G. Brindis

  • 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

    Catherine M. Otto;Rick A. Nishimura;Robert O. Bonow;Blase A. Carabello

  • Dabigatran versus Warfarin in Patients with Mechanical Heart Valves

    John W. Eikelboom;Stuart J. Connolly;Martina Brueckmann;Christopher B. Granger

  • 2012 ACCF/AATS/SCAI/STS Expert Consensus Document on Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

    David R. Holmes;Michael J. Mack;Sanjay Kaul;Arvind Agnihotri

  • Valve Academic Research Consortium 3: Updated Endpoint Definitions for Aortic Valve Clinical Research.

    Philippe Généreux;Nicolo Piazza;Maria C. Alu

  • 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease

    Catherine M. Otto;Rick A. Nishimura;Robert O. Bonow;Blase A. Carabello

  • 2011 ACCF/AHA Guideline for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

    L. David Hillis;Peter K. Smith;Jeffrey L. Anderson;John A. Bittl

  • Transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis

    Vinod H. Thourani;Susheel Kodali;Raj R. Makkar;Howard C. Herrmann

  • Frailty Assessment in the Cardiovascular Care of Older Adults

    Jonathan Afilalo;Karen Patton Alexander;Michael J. Mack;Mathew S. Maurer

  • Anatomical and clinical characteristics to guide decision making between coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention for individual patients: development and validation of SYNTAX score II

    Vasim Farooq;David Van Klaveren;Ewout W. Steyerberg;Emanuele Meliga

  • 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with standard treatment for patients with inoperable aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial

    Samir R Kapadia;Martin B Leon;Raj R Makkar;E Murat Tuzcu

  • Outcomes in Patients With De Novo Left Main Disease Treated With Either Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents or Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Treatment in the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) Trial

    Marie Claude Morice;Patrick W. Serruys;A. Pieter Kappetein;Ted E. Feldman

  • Randomized Comparison of Percutaneous Repair and Surgery for Mitral Regurgitation 5-Year Results of EVEREST II

    Ted Feldman;Saibal Kar;Sammy Elmariah;Steven C. Smart

  • Two-year outcomes of surgical treatment of severe ischemic mitral regurgitation

    Robert E. Michler;Peter K. Smith;Michael K. Parides;Gorav Ailawadi

Frequent Co-Authors

Martin B. Leon
Martin B. Leon Columbia University Medical Center
David R. Holmes
David R. Holmes Mayo Clinic
Susheel Kodali
Susheel Kodali Columbia University Medical Center
Raj Makkar
Raj Makkar Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
Vinod H. Thourani
Vinod H. Thourani Georgetown University
Samir R. Kapadia
Samir R. Kapadia Cleveland Clinic
Howard C. Herrmann
Howard C. Herrmann University of Pennsylvania
Lars G. Svensson
Lars G. Svensson Cleveland Clinic
E. Murat Tuzcu
E. Murat Tuzcu Cleveland Clinic
John G. Webb
John G. Webb University of British Columbia

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

Medicine is a diverse field, and there are several online degree options that can help you kickstart or advance your healthcare career. Many students consider nursing as a practical pathway, especially with the rise of affordable and flexible online programs. Options like the cheapest online accelerated bsn programs are popular for those aiming to become registered nurses quickly and cost-effectively.

For current RNs looking to enhance their qualifications, cheapest bsn programs offer a streamlined path to earn a Bachelor’s degree. This not only boosts career prospects but might also lead to higher salaries.

For those interested in advanced practice and research roles, online phd nursing programs can open doors to leadership, teaching, or specialized clinical positions.

If you’re not a nurse yet but want to enter advanced practice quickly, direct entry nurse practitioner programs for non-nurses online provide an accelerated route into nurse practitioner roles, even for those without a prior nursing background.

Best Scientists Citing Michael J. Mack

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles