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 119 3895 3648 153 149 968 52728

Paul Fockens publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Paul Fockens between 1957 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Paul Fockens published across 69 years, from 1957 to 2025, averaging 15.2 papers a year. Output peaked at 79 publications in 2009. 51 of the 1,052 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
25 50 75
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1957 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 79. Peak 79 publications in 2009. 1957: 1 publication 1958: 0 publications 1959: 0 publications 1960: 0 publications 1961: 0 publications 1962: 0 publications 1963: 0 publications 1964: 0 publications 1965: 0 publications 1966: 0 publications 1967: 0 publications 1968: 0 publications 1969: 0 publications 1970: 0 publications 1971: 0 publications 1972: 0 publications 1973: 0 publications 1974: 0 publications 1975: 0 publications 1976: 0 publications 1977: 0 publications 1978: 0 publications 1979: 0 publications 1980: 0 publications 1981: 0 publications 1982: 0 publications 1983: 0 publications 1984: 0 publications 1985: 0 publications 1986: 0 publications 1987: 0 publications 1988: 0 publications 1989: 2 publications 1990: 1 publication 1991: 2 publications 1992: 5 publications 1993: 2 publications 1994: 6 publications 1995: 11 publications 1996: 12 publications 1997: 7 publications 1998: 8 publications 1999: 6 publications 2000: 11 publications 2001: 11 publications 2002: 7 publications 2003: 6 publications 2004: 11 publications 2005: 25 publications 2006: 42 publications 2007: 39 publications 2008: 53 publications 2009: 79 publications 2010: 47 publications 2011: 63 publications 2012: 70 publications 2013: 55 publications 2014: 44 publications 2015: 48 publications 2016: 41 publications 2017: 34 publications 2018: 28 publications 2019: 36 publications 2020: 44 publications 2021: 61 publications 2022: 43 publications 2023: 40 publications 2024: 27 publications 2025: 24 publications
1957 2025

1,052 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Paul Fockens: publications per year, 1957 to 2025
Year Publications
1957 1
1958 0
1959 0
1960 0
1961 0
1962 0
1963 0
1964 0
1965 0
1966 0
1967 0
1968 0
1969 0
1970 0
1971 0
1972 0
1973 0
1974 0
1975 0
1976 0
1977 0
1978 0
1979 0
1980 0
1981 0
1982 0
1983 0
1984 0
1985 0
1986 0
1987 0
1988 0
1989 2
1990 1
1991 2
1992 5
1993 2
1994 6
1995 11
1996 12
1997 7
1998 8
1999 6
2000 11
2001 11
2002 7
2003 6
2004 11
2005 25
2006 42
2007 39
2008 53
2009 79
2010 47
2011 63
2012 70
2013 55
2014 44
2015 48
2016 41
2017 34
2018 28
2019 36
2020 44
2021 61
2022 43
2023 40
2024 27
2025 24
Total 1,052
Download as CSV

Paul Fockens 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 Paul Fockens 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, 961–980 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: 968 publications — 93rd percentile

93% 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
881–900 139
901–920 145
921–940 116
941–960 133
961–980 91 968
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

Paul Fockens 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 Paul Fockens 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, 118–119 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: 119 D-Index — 81st percentile

81% 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
112–113 399
114–115 393
116–117 318
118–119 302 119
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

Paul Fockens is affiliated with the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands and specializes in the field of Medicine. Their research work encompasses a broad range of topics primarily within surgical and gastroenterological contexts.

Their scholarly contributions span several subfields of study including Surgery, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, Oncology, Gastroenterology, and Epidemiology. This diversity reflects an interdisciplinary approach to medical research.

The main research topics covered in their work include:

  • Gallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
  • Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Esophageal and GI Pathology
  • Pancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
  • Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
  • Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
  • Pediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and Treatments

Fockens has published articles in several frequent publication venues, indicating active engagement with leading journals in their field. The most common venues for their publications include:

  • Endoscopy
  • Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
  • Digestive Endoscopy
  • Gastroenterology
  • Pancreatology

The scientist's recent papers reflect a focus on gastrointestinal procedures, pancreatitis, and colorectal cancer, among other topics. Notable recent publications include:

  • "Novel classification for adverse events in GI endoscopy: the AGREE classification" (2021, Gastrointestinal Endoscopy)
  • "Immediate versus Postponed Intervention for Infected Necrotizing Pancreatitis" (2021, New England Journal of Medicine)
  • "Effect of Early Surgery vs Endoscopy-First Approach on Pain in Patients With Chronic Pancreatitis" (2020, JAMA)
  • "European guidelines on achalasia: United European Gastroenterology and European Society of Neurogastroenterology and Motility recommendations" (2020, United European Gastroenterology Journal)
  • "Deep Submucosal Invasion Is Not an Independent Risk Factor for Lymph Node Metastasis in T1 Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis" (2022, Gastroenterology)

Frequent collaborators in their research include Rogier P. Voermans, Marc G. Besselink, Jeanin E. van Hooft, Marco J. Bruno, and Evelien Dekker. These coauthors have worked extensively with Fockens, as shown by the number of joint publications.

Best Publications

  • Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus.

    Jan B F Hulscher;Johanna W van Sandick;Angela G E M de Boer;Bas P L Wijnhoven

  • European evidence-based guidelines on pancreatic cystic neoplasms

    Marco Del Chiaro;Marc G. Besselink;Lianne Scholten;Marco J. Bruno

  • Colorectal polypectomy and endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR): European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Clinical Guideline

    Monika Ferlitsch;Alan Moss;Cesare Hassan;Pradeep Bhandari

  • Random comparison of guaiac and immunochemical fecal occult blood tests for colorectal cancer in a screening population.

    Leo G. van Rossum;Anne F. van Rijn;Robert J. Laheij;Martijn G. van Oijen

  • Extended transthoracic resection compared with limited transhiatal resection for adenocarcinoma of the mid/distal esophagus: five-year survival of a randomized clinical trial.

    Jikke M. T. Omloo;Sjoerd M. Lagarde;Jan B. F. Hulscher;Johannes B. Reitsma

  • Endoscopic transgastric vs surgical necrosectomy for infected necrotizing pancreatitis: a randomized trial.

    Olaf J. Bakker;Hjalmar C. van Santvoort;Sandra van Brunschot;Ronald B. Geskus

  • International cancer of the pancreas screening (CAPS) consortium summit on the management of patients with increased risk for familial pancreatic cancer

    Marcia Irene Canto;Femme Harinck;Ralph H. Hruban;George Johan Offerhaus

  • United European Gastroenterology evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and therapy of chronic pancreatitis (HaPanEU)

    J Matthias Löhr;Enrique Dominguez-Munoz;Jonas Rosendahl;Marc Besselink

  • Endoscopic or surgical step-up approach for infected necrotising pancreatitis : A multicentre randomised trial

    Sandra van Brunschot;Janneke van Grinsven;Hjalmar C van Santvoort;Olaf J Bakker

  • Randomised trial of endoscopic balloon dilation versus endoscopic sphincterotomy for removal of bileduct stones

    Jacques Jghm Bergman;Erik Aj Rauws;Paul Fockens;Anne-Marie van Berkel

  • Colonic stenting versus emergency surgery for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: a multicentre randomised trial

    Jeanin E van Hooft;Jeanin E van Hooft;Willem A Bemelman;Bas Oldenburg;Andreas W Marinelli

  • High prevalence of pancreatic cysts detected by screening magnetic resonance imaging examinations.

    Koen de Jong;C. Yung Nio;John J. Hermans;Marcel G. Dijkgraaf

  • Laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumours (LEOPARD-2) : a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised controlled phase 2/3 trial

    Jony van Hilst;Thijs de Rooij;Koop Bosscha;David J Brinkman

  • Management of patients with increased risk for familial pancreatic cancer: updated recommendations from the International Cancer of the Pancreas Screening (CAPS) Consortium

    Michael Goggins;Kasper Alexander Overbeek;Randall Brand;Sapna Syngal

  • Detection and classification of the mucosal and vascular patterns (mucosal morphology) in Barrett's esophagus by using narrow band imaging

    Mohammed A. Kara;Mohamed Ennahachi;Paul Fockens;Fiebo J.W. ten Kate

  • Acute pancreatitis: recent advances through randomised trials

    Sven M van Dijk;Nora D L Hallensleben;Hjalmar C van Santvoort;Paul Fockens

  • Endoscopic or Surgical Myotomy in Patients with Idiopathic Achalasia

    Yuki B Werner;Bengt Hakanson;Jan Martinek;Alessandro Repici

  • Participation and yield of colonoscopy versus non-cathartic CT colonography in population-based screening for colorectal cancer: a randomised controlled trial

    Esther M Stoop;Margriet C de Haan;Thomas R de Wijkerslooth;Patrick M Bossuyt

  • High-Resolution Endoscopy Plus Chromoendoscopy or Narrow-Band Imaging in Barrett’s Esophagus: a Prospective Randomized Crossover Study

    M. A. Kara;F. P. Peters;W. D. Rosmolen;K. K. Krishnadath

  • Peroral Endoscopic Myotomy for the Treatment of Achalasia: An International Prospective Multicenter Study

    Daniel Von Renteln;Karl–Hermann Fuchs;Paul Fockens;Peter Bauerfeind

Frequent Co-Authors

Marco J. Bruno
Marco J. Bruno Erasmus University Rotterdam
Jeanin E. van Hooft
Jeanin E. van Hooft University of Amsterdam
Jacques J. Bergman
Jacques J. Bergman University of Amsterdam
Marc G. Besselink
Marc G. Besselink University of Amsterdam
Patrick M.M. Bossuyt
Patrick M.M. Bossuyt University of Amsterdam
Marcel G. W. Dijkgraaf
Marcel G. W. Dijkgraaf University of Amsterdam
Fiebo J.W. ten Kate
Fiebo J.W. ten Kate Utrecht University
Willem A. Bemelman
Willem A. Bemelman University of Amsterdam
Ernst J. Kuipers
Ernst J. Kuipers Nanyang Technological University
Hjalmar C. van Santvoort
Hjalmar C. van Santvoort Utrecht 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

Pursuing a career in medicine opens up diverse opportunities beyond traditional clinical roles. For those interested in healthcare leadership, an online healthcare administration degree can provide a strong foundation in management, policy, and operations within healthcare settings.

Advancing further, many professionals consider online mha programs affordable to enhance their qualifications for higher-level administrative and executive positions in hospitals, clinics, and health systems. These degree programs offer flexibility and affordability, making them accessible to working adults.

For nurses aiming for clinical and leadership excellence, the most affordable online dnp programs offer an advanced pathway to become nurse practitioners or healthcare leaders, blending evidence-based practice with innovation in patient care.

Those interested in pharmaceutical sciences can explore online pharmacist programs. These programs provide the necessary training to become licensed pharmacists and contribute to improving medication management and patient safety.

Exploring these online degrees can help you discover alternative or complementary career pathways in the rapidly evolving healthcare sector.

Best Scientists Citing Paul Fockens

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles