World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
84
Citations
31083
World Ranking
14953
National Ranking
493

Nehmat Houssami 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 Nehmat Houssami 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: 372 publications — 32nd percentile

32% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Nehmat Houssami 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 Nehmat Houssami 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: 84 D-Index — 27th percentile

27% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Nehmat Houssami is a researcher affiliated with the University of Sydney in Australia, specializing primarily in Medicine with a focused concentration on Oncology. Their work spans numerous subfields including Artificial Intelligence, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, Cancer Research, and Radiology, Nuclear Medicine, and Imaging.

The core topics of their research encompass Global Cancer Incidence and Screening, AI in cancer detection, Digital Radiography and Breast Imaging, Breast Cancer Treatment Studies, Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education, Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging, as well as Cancer Risks and Factors.

Among recent published works involving their research interests are:

  • Global patterns and trends in breast cancer incidence and mortality across 185 countries, 2025, Nature Medicine
  • Recommendations for triage, prioritization and treatment of breast cancer patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, 2020, The Breast
  • Utopia versus dystopia: Professional perspectives on the impact of healthcare artificial intelligence on clinical roles and skills, 2022, International Journal of Medical Informatics
  • A systematic review of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer screening and diagnosis, 2023, The Breast
  • Artificial intelligence (AI) for breast cancer screening: BreastScreen population-based cohort study of cancer detection, 2023, EBioMedicine

Their frequent collaborators include Brooke Nickel, M. Luke Marinovich, Kirsten McCaffery, Meagan Brennan, and Tong Li. This network reflects interdisciplinary engagement in oncology and AI-driven medical research.

Publications are commonly featured in venues such as The Breast, European Radiology, Patient Education and Counseling, The Medical Journal of Australia, and SSRN Electronic Journal. These reflect areas of clinical practice, radiologic imaging, and broader medical education and communication.

Best Publications

  • Society of surgical oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages i and II invasive breast cancer

    Meena S. Moran;Stuart J. Schnitt;Armando E. Giuliano;Jay R. Harris

  • Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systematic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer.

    Nehmat Houssami;Stefano Ciatto;Petra Macaskill;Sarah J. Lord

  • Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study.

    Stefano Ciatto;Nehmat Houssami;Daniela Bernardi;Francesca Caumo

  • ESO-ESMO 2nd international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC2)

    F. Cardoso;A. Costa;L. Norton;E. Senkus

  • Society of Surgical Oncology–American Society for Radiation Oncology–American Society of Clinical Oncology Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery with Whole-Breast Irradiation in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

    Monica Morrow;Kimberly J. Van Zee;Lawrence J. Solin;Nehmat Houssami

  • Meta-analysis of the association of breast cancer subtype and pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy☆

    Nehmat Houssami;Petra Macaskill;Gunter von Minckwitz;Michael L. Marinovich

  • The association of surgical margins and local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy: a meta-analysis.

    Nehmat Houssami;Petra Macaskill;M. Luke Marinovich;Monica Morrow

  • Meta-analysis of the impact of surgical margins on local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy

    Nehmat Houssami;Petra Macaskill;M. Luke Marinovich;J. Michael Dixon

  • Ductal Carcinoma in Situ at Core-Needle Biopsy: Meta-Analysis of Underestimation and Predictors of Invasive Breast Cancer

    Meagan E. Brennan;Robin M. Turner;Stefano Ciatto;M. Luke Marinovich

  • 1st International consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 1)

    F. Cardoso;A. Costa;L. Norton;D. Cameron

  • Meta-Analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Detecting Residual Breast Cancer After Neoadjuvant Therapy

    Michael L. Marinovich;Nehmat Houssami;Petra Macaskill;Francesco Sardanelli

  • Preoperative ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of axillary nodes in invasive breast cancer: meta-analysis of its accuracy and utility in staging the axilla.

    Nehmat Houssami;Stefano Ciatto;Robin M. Turner;Hiram S. Cody

  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening of the Contralateral Breast in Women With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Incremental Cancer Detection and Impact on Surgical Management

    Meagan Elizabeth Brennan;Nehmat Houssami;Sarah Lord;Petra Macaskill

  • A systematic review of the effectiveness of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as an addition to mammography and ultrasound in screening young women at high risk of breast cancer.

    S.J. Lord;W. Lei;P. Craft;P. Craft;J.N. Cawson

  • Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer: meta-analysis of surgical outcomes.

    Nehmat Houssami;Robin Turner;Monica Morrow

  • Review of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in breast cancer: should MRI be performed on all women with newly diagnosed, early stage breast cancer?

    Nehmat Houssami;Daniel F. Hayes

  • Use of a decision aid including information on overdetection to support informed choice about breast cancer screening: a randomised controlled trial

    Jolyn Hersch;Alexandra Barratt;Jesse Jansen;Les Irwig

  • Correcting for Lead Time and Length Bias in Estimating the Effect of Screen Detection on Cancer Survival

    Stephen W. Duffy;Iris D. Nagtegaal;Matthew Wallis;Fay H. Cafferty

  • Breast cancer screening with tomosynthesis (3D mammography) with acquired or synthetic 2D mammography compared with 2D mammography alone (STORM-2): a population-based prospective study

    Daniela Bernardi;Petra Macaskill;Marco Pellegrini;Marvi Valentini

  • Categorizing breast mammographic density: intra- and interobserver reproducibility of BI-RADS density categories.

    S. Ciatto;N. Houssami;A. Apruzzese;E. Bassetti

Frequent Co-Authors

Les Irwig
Les Irwig University of Sydney
Monica Morrow
Monica Morrow Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Kirsten McCaffery
Kirsten McCaffery University of Sydney
Diana L. Miglioretti
Diana L. Miglioretti University of California, Davis
Stacy M Carter
Stacy M Carter University of Wollongong
Diana S. M. Buist
Diana S. M. Buist Kaiser Permanente
Stuart J. Schnitt
Stuart J. Schnitt Brigham and Women's Hospital
Anna Sapino
Anna Sapino University of Turin
Karla Kerlikowske
Karla Kerlikowske University of California, San Francisco
Thomas H. Helbich
Thomas H. Helbich Medical University of Vienna

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 medicine in the USA often raises questions about alternative healthcare degrees and flexible options for career growth. Many students and working professionals are turning to online programs for their convenience, affordability, and accessibility.

Nurses seeking to advance their credentials sometimes opt for cheapest dnp programs available online, enabling them to reach the highest level of clinical nursing with minimal financial strain. Similarly, current registered nurses interested in elevating their qualification can take advantage of rn to bsn online programs, which offer a cost-effective and flexible path to a Bachelor of Science in Nursing.

For individuals with non-nursing backgrounds keen to enter the profession, direct entry msn programs for non-nurses online provide an accelerated route directly into advanced practice roles. Additionally, those looking for easier admission requirements may consider schools highlighted in the easiest bsn program to get into list to start their healthcare career journey sooner.

Choosing the right degree pathway depends on your current education, career ambitions, and preferred learning format. Online nursing and medical degrees make it possible to balance advancement with life’s other responsibilities.

Best Scientists Citing Nehmat Houssami

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles