World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Mikkel Østergaard

Mikkel Østergaard

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 110 5570 5233 60 57 880 43990

Mikkel Østergaard publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Mikkel Østergaard between 1992 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Mikkel Østergaard published across 34 years, from 1992 to 2025, averaging 29.5 papers a year. Output peaked at 74 publications in 2020. 91 of the 1,002 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
20 40 60
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1992 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 74. Peak 74 publications in 2020. 1992: 1 publication 1993: 0 publications 1994: 4 publications 1995: 6 publications 1996: 3 publications 1997: 3 publications 1998: 3 publications 1999: 5 publications 2000: 3 publications 2001: 11 publications 2002: 5 publications 2003: 10 publications 2004: 10 publications 2005: 20 publications 2006: 17 publications 2007: 21 publications 2008: 17 publications 2009: 31 publications 2010: 34 publications 2011: 46 publications 2012: 30 publications 2013: 65 publications 2014: 60 publications 2015: 51 publications 2016: 60 publications 2017: 60 publications 2018: 55 publications 2019: 68 publications 2020: 74 publications 2021: 61 publications 2022: 36 publications 2023: 41 publications 2024: 54 publications 2025: 37 publications
1992 2025

1,002 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Mikkel Østergaard: publications per year, 1992 to 2025
Year Publications
1992 1
1993 0
1994 4
1995 6
1996 3
1997 3
1998 3
1999 5
2000 3
2001 11
2002 5
2003 10
2004 10
2005 20
2006 17
2007 21
2008 17
2009 31
2010 34
2011 46
2012 30
2013 65
2014 60
2015 51
2016 60
2017 60
2018 55
2019 68
2020 74
2021 61
2022 36
2023 41
2024 54
2025 37
Total 1,002
Download as CSV

Mikkel Østergaard publications per year - data summary

  • Mikkel Østergaard, a Medicine scholar from University of Copenhagen, has 1,002 publications recorded across 34 years, from 1992 to 2025.
  • The oldest publication on record dates to 1992 and the most recent to 2025.
  • The most productive year is 2020, with 74 publications.
  • The least productive year with any output is 1992, with 1 publication.
  • 1 of the 34 years in the span carries no publications at all (1993).
  • The rate of publication averages 29.5 papers per year over the whole span, or 30.4 per year counting only the 33 years with at least one publication.
  • The last 5 years on the chart (2021-2025) hold 229 publications, 23% of the career total.
  • Split into equal eras - 1992-2003: 54 publications (4.5 per year); 2004-2015: 402 publications (33.5 per year); 2016-2025: 546 publications (54.6 per year).
  • Comparing the opening and closing eras, the overall trend of publication is rising.

Mikkel Østergaard 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 Mikkel Østergaard 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, 861–880 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: 880 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.

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
861–880 155 880
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

Mikkel Østergaard publication distribution in Medicine in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the publication count of all 20,134 Medicine scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 86 ranges running from 101–120 to 1,796+ publications.
  • Mikkel Østergaard, a Medicine scholar from University of Copenhagen, records 880 publications - the 91st percentile of the discipline.
  • 91% of ranked Medicine scientists score the same or lower than Mikkel Østergaard, and about 9% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 441–460 publications range, and Mikkel Østergaard ranks above the median.
  • The most crowded range is 341–360 publications, holding 922 scientists (5% of the field).
  • 64% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 521–540 publications), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more, 100 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

Mikkel Østergaard 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 Mikkel Østergaard 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, 110–111 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: 110 D-Index — 73rd percentile

73% 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
110–111 429 110
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

Mikkel Østergaard D-index placement in Medicine in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the discipline H-index (D-index) of all 20,134 Medicine scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 75 ranges running from 70–71 to 217+ D-Index.
  • Mikkel Østergaard, a Medicine scholar from University of Copenhagen, records 110 D-Index - the 73rd percentile of the discipline.
  • 73% of ranked Medicine scientists score the same or lower than Mikkel Østergaard, and about 27% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 94–95 D-Index range, and Mikkel Østergaard ranks above the median.
  • The most crowded range is 82–83 D-Index, holding 1,027 scientists (5% of the field).
  • 70% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 106–107 D-Index), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more, 98 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

Overview

Mikkel Østergaard is affiliated with the University of Copenhagen in Denmark and has produced extensive research in the field of medicine, with a strong focus on rheumatology. Their work spans several subfields including immunology, orthopedics and sports medicine, hematology, and pathology and forensic medicine.

Their research topics cover a range of areas connected to autoimmune and inflammatory disorders, with significant contributions to studies on spondyloarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Additional focus areas include psoriasis treatment and pathogenesis, bone and joint diseases, systemic lupus erythematosus research, and spine and intervertebral disc pathology.

Frequent publication venues for their research are diverse and include:

  • Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
  • Lara D. Veeken
  • RMD Open
  • The Journal of Rheumatology
  • Arthritis Research & Therapy

Mikkel Østergaard has coauthored numerous papers with several researchers who frequently collaborate on related medical topics. These coauthors include Merete Lund Hetland, Lykke Midtbøll Ørnbjerg, Björn Guðbjörnsson, Walter P. Maksymowych, and Susanne Juhl Pedersen.

Notable recent papers include:

  • Active conventional treatment and three different biological treatments in early rheumatoid arthritis: phase IV investigator initiated, randomised, observer blinded clinical trial (2020, BMJ)
  • Abatacept inhibits inflammation and onset of rheumatoid arthritis in individuals at high risk (ARIAA): a randomised, international, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (2024, The Lancet)
  • Data-driven definitions for active and structural MRI lesions in the sacroiliac joint in spondyloarthritis and their predictive utility (2021, Lara D. Veeken)
  • MRI lesions of the spine in patients with axial spondyloarthritis: an update of lesion definitions and validation by the ASAS MRI working group (2022, Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases)
  • Drug retention, inactive disease and response rates in 1860 patients with axial spondyloarthritis initiating secukinumab treatment: routine care data from 13 registries in the EuroSpA collaboration (2020, RMD Open)

Best Publications

  • Treating rheumatoid arthritis to target: 2014 update of the recommendations of an international task force

    Josef S Smolen;Ferdinand C Breedveld;Gerd R Burmester;Vivian Bykerk

  • Musculoskeletal ultrasound including definitions for ultrasonographic pathology

    Richard J Wakefield;Peter V Balint;Marcin Szkudlarek;Emilio Filippucci

  • Defining active sacroiliitis on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for classification of axial spondyloarthritis: a consensual approach by the ASAS/OMERACT MRI group

    M. Rudwaleit;A. G. Jurik;K.-G. A. Hermann;R. Landewé

  • OMERACT Rheumatoid Arthritis Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies. Core set of MRI acquisitions, joint pathology definitions, and the OMERACT RA-MRI scoring system.

    Mikkel Østergaard;Charles Peterfy;Philip Conaghan;Fiona McQueen

  • EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging of the joints in the clinical management of rheumatoid arthritis

    Alexandra N. Colebatch;Christopher John Edwards;Mikkel Østergaard;Désirée Van Der Heijde

  • Interobserver agreement in ultrasonography of the finger and toe joints in rheumatoid arthritis

    Marcin Szkudlarek;Michel Court-Payen;Søren Jacobsen;Mette Klarlund

  • Direct comparison of treatment responses, remission rates, and drug adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with adalimumab, etanercept, or infliximab: results from eight years of surveillance of clinical practice in the nationwide Danish DANBIO registry.

    Merete Lund Hetland;Ib Jarle Christensen;Ulrik Tarp;Lene Dreyer

  • Multinational evidence-based recommendations for the use of methotrexate in rheumatic disorders with a focus on rheumatoid arthritis: integrating systematic literature research and expert opinion of a broad international panel of rheumatologists in the 3E Initiative

    K Visser;W Katchamart;E Loza;J A Martinez-Lopez

  • EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging in the diagnosis and management of spondyloarthritis in clinical practice

    P Mandl;V Navarro-Compán;L Terslev;P Aegerter

  • Power doppler ultrasonography for assessment of synovitis in the metacarpophalangeal joints of patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A comparison with dynamic magnetic resonance imaging

    Marcin Szkudlarek;Michel Court‐Payen;Charlotte Strandberg;Mette Klarlund

  • Ultrasonography of the metatarsophalangeal joints in rheumatoid arthritis: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging, conventional radiography, and clinical examination.

    Marcin Szkudlarek;Eva Narvestad;Mette Klarlund;Michel Court-Payen

  • Defining active sacroiliitis on MRI for classification of axial spondyloarthritis: update by the ASAS MRI working group

    Robert G W Lambert;Pauline A C Bakker;Désirée van der Heijde;Ulrich Weber

  • MRI bone oedema is the strongest predictor of subsequent radiographic progression in early rheumatoid arthritis. Results from a 2-year randomised controlled trial (CIMESTRA)

    M L Hetland;B Ejbjerg;K Hørslev-Petersen;S Jacobsen

  • Inflammatory lesions of the spine on magnetic resonance imaging predict the development of new syndesmophytes in ankylosing spondylitis: Evidence of a relationship between inflammation and new bone formation

    Walter P. Maksymowych;Praveena Chiowchanwisawakit;Praveena Chiowchanwisawakit;Tracey Clare;Susanne J. Pedersen

  • Magnetic resonance imaging–determined synovial membrane volume as a marker of disease activity and a predictor of progressive joint destruction in the wrists of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

    Mikkel Østergaard;Michael Hansen;Michael Stoltenberg;Peter Gideon

  • An introduction to the EULAR–OMERACT rheumatoid arthritis MRI reference image atlas

    M Østergaard;J Edmonds;F McQueen;C Peterfy

  • Magnetic resonance imaging findings in 84 patients with early rheumatoid arthritis: bone marrow oedema predicts erosive progression

    Espen A Haavardsholm;Pernille Bøyesen;Mikkel Østergaard;Arnulf Schildvold

  • Risankizumab, an IL-23 inhibitor, for ankylosing spondylitis: results of a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept, dose-finding phase 2 study.

    Dominique Baeten;Mikkel Østergaard;James Cheng-Chung Wei;Joachim Sieper

  • Ultrasonography of the metacarpophalangeal and proximal interphalangeal joints in rheumatoid arthritis: a comparison with magnetic resonance imaging, conventional radiography and clinical examination

    Marcin Szkudlarek;Mette Klarlund;Eva Narvestad;Michel Court-Payen

  • The diagnostic utility of magnetic resonance imaging in spondylarthritis: an international multicenter evaluation of one hundred eighty-seven subjects.

    Ulrich Weber;Robert G. W. Lambert;Mikkel Østergaard;Juerg Hodler

Frequent Co-Authors

Philip G. Conaghan
Philip G. Conaghan University of Leeds
Paul Emery
Paul Emery University of Leeds
Walter P. Maksymowych
Walter P. Maksymowych University of Alberta
Charles Peterfy
Charles Peterfy University of California, San Francisco
Søren Jacobsen
Søren Jacobsen Copenhagen University Hospital
Bent Deleuran
Bent Deleuran Aarhus University Hospital
Tore K. Kvien
Tore K. Kvien University of Oslo
Harry K. Genant
Harry K. Genant University of California, San Francisco
Henning Bliddal
Henning Bliddal Copenhagen University Hospital
Robin Christensen
Robin Christensen University of Southern Denmark

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 your options beyond traditional medical degrees can open new career doors in the healthcare field. Online programs offer flexible ways to advance your education while balancing work and personal commitments. For example, if you are passionate about mental health, consider accelerated msn psychiatric np programs, which allow you to quickly specialize and serve patients in high-demand areas.

Healthcare doesn’t just need doctors—there’s a strong demand for leaders and administrators. With online healthcare administration programs, you can build essential business and management skills for a variety of leadership roles. If cost is a concern, cheapest mha online programs make earning an advanced degree more accessible.

For nurses aiming to reach the highest clinical practice level, options like cheapest bsn to dnp programs offer affordable and reputable pathways. With so many online and distance learning opportunities available, finding a degree that matches your interests and budget has never been easier.

Best Scientists Citing Mikkel Østergaard

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles