World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
142
Citations
124468
World Ranking
1530
National Ranking
889

Norman Wolmark 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 Norman Wolmark 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: 536 publications — 64th percentile

64% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Norman Wolmark 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 Norman Wolmark 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: 142 D-Index — 92nd percentile

92% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Norman Wolmark is affiliated with the University of Pittsburgh in the United States. Their research primarily spans the fields of Medicine and Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology, with significant contributions to Oncology, Cancer Research, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, Pathology and Forensic Medicine, and Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging.

Wolmark's work covers multiple main topics, including Breast Cancer Treatment Studies, Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies, Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics, HER2/EGFR in Cancer Research, Genetic factors in colorectal cancer, Cancer Treatment and Pharmacology, and Advanced Breast Cancer Therapies.

They have published extensively in several leading journals. The most frequent publication venues include the Journal of Clinical Oncology with 74 publications, Cancer Research with 24 publications, Clinical Cancer Research with 10 publications, Annals of Oncology with 8 publications, and JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute with 6 publications.

Their recent notable papers are:

  • Adjuvant Olaparib for Patients with BRCA1- or BRCA2-Mutated Breast Cancer, 2021, New England Journal of Medicine
  • Trastuzumab for early-stage, HER2-positive breast cancer: a meta-analysis of 13,864 women in seven randomised trials, 2021, The Lancet Oncology
  • Adjuvant Palbociclib for Early Breast Cancer: The PALLAS Trial Results (ABCSG-42/AFT-05/BIG-14-03), 2021, Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • Long-term efficacy and safety of addition of carboplatin with or without veliparib to standard neoadjuvant chemotherapy in triple-negative breast cancer: 4-year follow-up data from BrighTNess, a randomized phase III trial, 2022, Annals of Oncology
  • Use of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer, 2021, JAMA Oncology

Frequent collaborators include Greg Yothers, Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Peter C. Lucas, Charles E. Geyer, and Thomas J. George. The collaboration counts range from 47 to 63 joint works with these co-authors.

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

  • A Multigene Assay to Predict Recurrence of Tamoxifen-Treated, Node-Negative Breast Cancer

    Soonmyung Paik;Steven Shak;Gong Tang;Chungyeul Kim

  • Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer

    Edward H. Romond;Edith A. Perez;John Bryant;Vera J. Suman

  • Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis

    Patricia Cortazar;Lijun Zhang;Michael Untch;Keyur Mehta

  • Gene Expression and Benefit of Chemotherapy in Women With Node-Negative, Estrogen Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer

    Soonmyung Paik;Gong Tang;Steven Shak;Chungyeul Kim

  • Sentinel-lymph-node resection compared with conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in clinically node-negative patients with breast cancer: overall survival findings from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase 3 trial

    David N. Krag;Stewart J. Anderson;Thomas B. Julian;Ann M. Brown

  • Trastuzumab Emtansine for Residual Invasive HER2-Positive Breast Cancer

    Gunter Von Minckwitz;Chiun Sheng Huang;Max S. Mano;Sibylle Loibl

  • Preoperative Chemotherapy: Updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27

    Priya Rastogi;Stewart J. Anderson;Harry D. Bear;Charles E. Geyer

  • Reanalysis and results after 12 years of follow-up in a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy with lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer.

    Fisher B;Anderson S;Redmond Ck;Wolmark N

  • Effects of tamoxifen vs raloxifene on the risk of developing invasive breast cancer and other disease outcomes: the NSABP Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 trial.

    Victor G. Vogel;Joseph P. Costantino;D. Lawrence Wickerham;D. Lawrence Wickerham;Walter M. Cronin

  • Ten-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing radical mastectomy and total mastectomy with or without radiation

    B Fisher;C Redmond;E R Fisher;M Bauer

  • Twenty-Five-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Trial Comparing Radical Mastectomy, Total Mastectomy, and Total Mastectomy Followed by Irradiation

    Bernard Fisher;Jong-Hyeon Jeong;Stewart Anderson;John Bryant

  • The Effect on Tumor Response of Adding Sequential Preoperative Docetaxel to Preoperative Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide: Preliminary Results From National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27

    Harry D. Bear;Stewart Anderson;Ann Brown;Roy Smith

  • Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation therapy for rectal cancer: results from NSABP protocol R-01.

    Bernard Fisher;Norman Wolmark;Howard Rockette;Carol Redmond

  • Technical outcomes of sentinel-lymph-node resection and conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer: results from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase III trial

    David N Krag;Stewart J Anderson;Thomas B Julian;Ann M Brown

  • Tamoxifen in treatment of intraductal breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-24 randomised controlled trial

    Bernard Fisher;James Dignam;Norman Wolmark;D Lawrence Wickerham

  • Oxaliplatin Combined With Weekly Bolus Fluorouracil and Leucovorin As Surgical Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II and III Colon Cancer: Results From NSABP C-07

    J. Philip Kuebler;H. Samuel Wieand;Michael J. O'Connell;Roy E. Smith

  • Sequential preoperative or postoperative docetaxel added to preoperative doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide for operable breast cancer : National surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project protocol B-27

    Harry D. Bear;Stewart Anderson;Roy E. Smith;Charles E. Geyer

  • Lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer: Findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-17

    B. Fisher;J. Dignam;N. Wolmark;E. Mamounas

  • Adjuvant Olaparib for Patients with BRCA1- or BRCA2-Mutated Breast Cancer

    Andrew N.J. Tutt;Judy E. Garber;Bella Kaufman;Giuseppe Viale

Frequent Co-Authors

Joseph P. Costantino
Joseph P. Costantino University of Pittsburgh
Eleftherios P. Mamounas
Eleftherios P. Mamounas University of Florida Health
Bernard Fisher
Bernard Fisher University of Pittsburgh
Soonmyung Paik
Soonmyung Paik Yonsei University
Sandra M. Swain
Sandra M. Swain Georgetown University Medical Center
Louis Fehrenbacher
Louis Fehrenbacher Kaiser Permanente
Patricia A. Ganz
Patricia A. Ganz University of California, Los Angeles
Charles E. Geyer
Charles E. Geyer University of Pittsburgh
Edwin R. Fisher
Edwin R. Fisher University of Pittsburgh

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 online degrees can offer flexibility and affordability to aspiring healthcare professionals. For registered nurses looking to advance their careers, the cheapest rn to bsn online programs provide a budget-friendly way to obtain a Bachelor of Science in Nursing without the high expenses of traditional schooling.

If you are considering entering the nursing field but hold a non-nursing bachelor’s degree, entry level msn programs online offer accelerated pathways to become a nurse and earn a master’s degree.

Prospective students concerned about competitive admissions may benefit from researching the easiest rn program options. These programs typically have higher acceptance rates, making entry into the nursing profession more accessible.

For those interested in healthcare from an administrative perspective, pursuing medical billing and coding is a popular alternative. Many schools provide online programs, and you can explore financial aid for medical billing and coding to help offset costs and support your studies.

Best Scientists Citing Norman Wolmark

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles