World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Computer Science

D-Index
37
Citations
4393
World Ranking
10927
National Ranking
4542

Peter Tarczy-Hornoch publication distribution in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Computer Science in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Peter Tarczy-Hornoch sits on this spectrum.

32–41 publications: 7 scientists 42–51 publications: 22 scientists 52–61 publications: 82 scientists 62–71 publications: 134 scientists 72–81 publications: 249 scientists 82–91 publications: 324 scientists 92–101 publications: 421 scientists 102–111 publications: 420 scientists 112–121 publications: 497 scientists 122–131 publications: 544 scientists 132–141 publications: 555 scientists 142–151 publications: 609 scientists 152–161 publications: 559 scientists 162–171 publications: 534 scientists 172–181 publications: 556 scientists 182–191 publications: 583 scientists 192–201 publications: 519 scientists 202–211 publications: 508 scientists 212–221 publications: 490 scientists 222–231 publications: 437 scientists 232–241 publications: 423 scientists 242–251 publications: 408 scientists 252–261 publications: 377 scientists 262–271 publications: 301 scientists 272–281 publications: 335 scientists 282–291 publications: 320 scientists 292–301 publications: 293 scientists 302–311 publications: 250 scientists 312–321 publications: 238 scientists 322–331 publications: 206 scientists 332–341 publications: 209 scientists 342–351 publications: 208 scientists 352–361 publications: 162 scientists 362–371 publications: 176 scientists 372–381 publications: 127 scientists 382–391 publications: 158 scientists 392–401 publications: 128 scientists 402–411 publications: 104 scientists 412–421 publications: 94 scientists 422–431 publications: 99 scientists 432–441 publications: 83 scientists 442–451 publications: 108 scientists 452–461 publications: 73 scientists 462–471 publications: 77 scientists 472–481 publications: 69 scientists 482–491 publications: 84 scientists 492–501 publications: 62 scientists 502–511 publications: 54 scientists 512–521 publications: 57 scientists 522–531 publications: 51 scientists 532–541 publications: 51 scientists 542–551 publications: 32 scientists 552–561 publications: 38 scientists 562–571 publications: 28 scientists 572–581 publications: 43 scientists 582–591 publications: 33 scientists 592–601 publications: 41 scientists 602–611 publications: 32 scientists 612–621 publications: 28 scientists 622–631 publications: 25 scientists 632–641 publications: 27 scientists 642–651 publications: 17 scientists 652–661 publications: 20 scientists 662–671 publications: 17 scientists 672–681 publications: 15 scientists 682–691 publications: 14 scientists 692–701 publications: 21 scientists 702–711 publications: 13 scientists 712–721 publications: 12 scientists 722–731 publications: 19 scientists 732–741 publications: 14 scientists 742–751 publications: 12 scientists 752–761 publications: 10 scientists 762–771 publications: 10 scientists 772–781 publications: 11 scientists 782–791 publications: 10 scientists 792–801 publications: 11 scientists 802–811 publications: 8 scientists 812–821 publications: 8 scientists 822–831 publications: 7 scientists 832–841 publications: 11 scientists 842–851 publications: 10 scientists 852–861 publications: 5 scientists 862–871 publications: 9 scientists 872–881 publications: 4 scientists 882–891 publications: 6 scientists 892–901 publications: 3 scientists 902–911 publications: 6 scientists 912–921 publications: 3 scientists 922–931 publications: 2 scientists 932–941 publications: 2 scientists 942–951 publications: 2 scientists 952–961 publications: 3 scientists 962–971 publications: 3 scientists 972–981 publications: 3 scientists 982–990 publications: 5 scientists 991+ publications: 100 scientists
32 publications 991+

This scientist: 132 publications — 19th percentile

19% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 991 publications or more.

Peter Tarczy-Hornoch D-index placement in Computer Science in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Computer Science scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Peter Tarczy-Hornoch sits on this spectrum.

30–31 D-Index: 879 scientists 32–33 D-Index: 983 scientists 34–35 D-Index: 918 scientists 36–37 D-Index: 990 scientists 38–39 D-Index: 968 scientists 40–41 D-Index: 907 scientists 42–43 D-Index: 821 scientists 44–45 D-Index: 763 scientists 46–47 D-Index: 689 scientists 48–49 D-Index: 543 scientists 50–51 D-Index: 543 scientists 52–53 D-Index: 518 scientists 54–55 D-Index: 500 scientists 56–57 D-Index: 458 scientists 58–59 D-Index: 400 scientists 60–61 D-Index: 337 scientists 62–63 D-Index: 308 scientists 64–65 D-Index: 292 scientists 66–67 D-Index: 249 scientists 68–69 D-Index: 213 scientists 70–71 D-Index: 192 scientists 72–73 D-Index: 189 scientists 74–75 D-Index: 165 scientists 76–77 D-Index: 139 scientists 78–79 D-Index: 119 scientists 80–81 D-Index: 121 scientists 82–83 D-Index: 113 scientists 84–85 D-Index: 88 scientists 86–87 D-Index: 87 scientists 88–89 D-Index: 75 scientists 90–91 D-Index: 69 scientists 92–93 D-Index: 57 scientists 94–95 D-Index: 46 scientists 96–97 D-Index: 38 scientists 98–99 D-Index: 34 scientists 100–101 D-Index: 36 scientists 102–103 D-Index: 27 scientists 104–105 D-Index: 37 scientists 106–107 D-Index: 18 scientists 108–109 D-Index: 31 scientists 110–111 D-Index: 19 scientists 112–113 D-Index: 16 scientists 114–115 D-Index: 12 scientists 116–117 D-Index: 20 scientists 118–119 D-Index: 15 scientists 120–121 D-Index: 5 scientists 122–123 D-Index: 20 scientists 124–125 D-Index: 8 scientists 126–127 D-Index: 5 scientists 128–129 D-Index: 7 scientists 130 D-Index: 3 scientists 131+ D-Index: 98 scientists
30 D-Index 131+

This scientist: 37 D-Index — 27th percentile

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

The last bar groups every scientist with 131 D-Index or more.

Overview

Peter Tarczy-Hornoch is affiliated with the University of Washington in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on Medicine, with particular emphasis on areas such as Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging, Physiology, Economics and Econometrics, and Surgery.

The scientist's work covers a variety of topics including Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life, Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials, Innovations in Medical Education, Radiology practices and education, COVID-19 diagnosis using AI, Body Composition Measurement Techniques, and Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies.

Recent publications demonstrate their involvement in diverse aspects of medical research and biomedical informatics. Notable papers include:

  • A Novel Food Record App for Dietary Assessments Among Older Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: Development and Usability Study, 2021, JMIR Formative Research
  • Implementation of pharmacogenomic clinical decision support for health systems: a cost-utility analysis, 2022, The Pharmacogenomics Journal
  • Uses of Electronic Health Record Data to Measure the Clinical Learning Environment of Graduate Medical Education Trainees: A Systematic Review, 2023, Academic Medicine
  • Novel informatics approaches to COVID-19 Research: From methods to applications, 2022, Journal of Biomedical Informatics
  • Development and Evaluation of Machine Learning Models for the Identification of Surgical Site Infection in Electronic Health Records, 2025, Surgical Infections

In terms of collaborative relationships, Peter Tarczy-Hornoch has frequently worked with several coauthors, including Brian H. Shirts, David L. Veenstra, Samuel Aronson, Stacy W. Gray, and Lucia A. Hindorff. These collaborations have produced multiple research outputs in relevant medical and informatics fields.

The scientist's publications appear commonly in venues such as UNC Libraries, JMIR Formative Research, The Pharmacogenomics Journal, Academic Medicine, and the Journal of Biomedical Informatics, indicating a strong presence in journals focusing on medicine, medical informatics, and pharmacogenomics.

Best Publications

  • AMIA Board white paper: definition of biomedical informatics and specification of core competencies for graduate education in the discipline

    Casimir A Kulikowski;Edward H Shortliffe;Leanne M Currie;Peter L Elkin

  • Methodological Review: Data integration and genomic medicine

    Brenton Louie;Peter Mork;Fernando Martin-Sanchez;Alon Halevy

  • Incorporating ideas from computer-supported cooperative work

    Wanda Pratt;Madhu C. Reddy;David W. McDonald;Peter Tarczy-Hornoch

  • Issues in Biomedical Research Data Management and Analysis: Needs and Barriers

    Nicholas R. Anderson;E. Sally Lee;J. Scott Brockenbrough;Mark E. Minie

  • Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium: Accelerating Evidence-Based Practice of Genomic Medicine

    Robert C. Green;Robert C. Green;Katrina A.B. Goddard;Gail P. Jarvik;Laura M. Amendola

  • CSER and eMERGE: Current and potential state of the display of genetic information in the electronic health record

    Brian H. Shirts;Joseph S. Salama;Samuel J. Aronson;Wendy K. Chung

  • A model for data integration systems of biomedical data applied to online genetic databases.

    P. Mork;A. Halevy;P. Tarczy-Hornoch

  • Personalized medicine: challenges and opportunities for translational bioinformatics

    Casey Lynnette Overby;Peter Tarczy-Hornoch

  • Usability evaluation of pharmacogenomics clinical decision support aids and clinical knowledge resources in a computerized provider order entry system: a mixed methods approach.

    Emily Beth Devine;Chia-Ju Lee;Casey Lynnette Overby;Neil F. Abernethy

  • GeneTests-GeneClinics: genetic testing information for a growing audience.

    Roberta A. Pagon;Roberta A. Pagon;Peter Tarczy-Hornoch;Patricia K. Baskin;Joseph E. Edwards

  • Opportunities for genomic clinical decision support interventions.

    Casey Lynnette Overby;Isaac Kohane;Joseph L. Kannry;Marc S. Williams

  • Incorporating collaboratory concepts into informatics in support of translational interdisciplinary biomedical research

    E. Sally Lee;David W. McDonald;Nicholas R. Anderson;Peter Tarczy-Hornoch

  • Translational bioinformatics: Linking knowledge across biological and clinical realms

    Indra Neil Sarkar;Atul J Butte;Yves A Lussier;Peter Tarczy-Hornoch

  • The implementation of a Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) based patient record and charting system: lessons learned.

    Aaron E. Carroll;Sunil Saluja;Peter Tarczy-Hornoch

  • A survey of informatics approaches to whole-exome and whole-genome clinical reporting in the electronic health record.

    Peter Tarczy-Hornoch;Peter Tarczy-Hornoch;Laura Amendola;Laura Amendola;Samuel J. Aronson;Samuel J. Aronson;Levi Garraway;Levi Garraway

  • Low-bandwidth, low-cost telemedicine consultations in rural family practice.

    Thomas E. Norris;Gary L. Hart;Eric H. Larson;Peter Tarczy-Hornoch

  • PQL: a declarative query language over dynamic biological schemata.

    Peter Mork;Ron Shaker;Alon Y. Halevy;Peter Tarczy-Hornoch

  • The BioMediator system as a data integration tool to answer diverse biologic queries.

    Loren Donelson;Peter Tarczy-Hornoch;Peter Mork;Cindy Dolan

  • Feasibility of incorporating genomic knowledge into electronic medical records for pharmacogenomic clinical decision support

    Casey Lynnette Overby;Peter Tarczy-Hornoch;James I Hoath;Ira J Kalet

  • A survey of informatics platforms that enable distributed comparative effectiveness research using multi-institutional heterogenous clinical data.

    Dean F. Sittig;Brian L. Hazlehurst;Jeffrey Brown;Shawn Murphy

  • Availability of structured and unstructured clinical data for comparative effectiveness research and quality improvement: a multisite assessment.

    Daniel Capurro;Meliha Yetisgen;Erik van Eaton;Robert Black

Frequent Co-Authors

Gail P. Jarvik
Gail P. Jarvik University of Washington
Eliezer M. Van Allen
Eliezer M. Van Allen Harvard University
David R. Flum
David R. Flum University of Washington
Donald L. Patrick
Donald L. Patrick University of Washington
Michael O. Dorschner
Michael O. Dorschner University of Washington
John H. Gennari
John H. Gennari University of Washington
Sean D. Mooney
Sean D. Mooney University of Washington
Patrick J. Heagerty
Patrick J. Heagerty University of Washington
Wylie Burke
Wylie Burke University of Washington
Peter J. Myler
Peter J. Myler Seattle Children's Hospital

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 Computer Science opens the door to diverse online degree options and career pathways. Many students pursue an accelerated computer science degree to fast-track their education and enter the tech workforce sooner. These programs are ideal for those seeking flexibility and a rapid transition into dynamic roles such as software development, data analysis, and IT management.

For students interested in environmental issues, the cheapest online environmental science degree options provide specialized knowledge and align with green industry demands. Similarly, an online mechanical engineering degree can lead to careers in robotics, manufacturing, or automotive industries without the need to attend in-person classes.

Those with a passion for science and research may find value in pursuing an online physics degree. Each pathway offers broad career possibilities and is designed to meet a variety of professional goals. With numerous accredited and affordable online programs, students can find options tailored to their interests and schedules.

Best Scientists Citing Peter Tarczy-Hornoch

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles