World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Biology and Biochemistry

D-Index
84
Citations
162350
World Ranking
3223
National Ranking
1629

Engineering and Technology

D-Index
77
Citations
160488
World Ranking
629
National Ranking
221

Philip E. Bourne publication distribution in Engineering and Technology in 2026

The chart shows the distribution of publications by all Research.com ranked scientists in the field of Engineering and Technology in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Philip E. Bourne sits on this spectrum.

38–47 publications: 20 scientists 48–57 publications: 35 scientists 58–67 publications: 96 scientists 68–77 publications: 135 scientists 78–87 publications: 190 scientists 88–97 publications: 259 scientists 98–107 publications: 283 scientists 108–117 publications: 369 scientists 118–127 publications: 341 scientists 128–137 publications: 386 scientists 138–147 publications: 372 scientists 148–157 publications: 457 scientists 158–167 publications: 415 scientists 168–177 publications: 407 scientists 178–187 publications: 421 scientists 188–197 publications: 378 scientists 198–207 publications: 403 scientists 208–217 publications: 317 scientists 218–227 publications: 346 scientists 228–237 publications: 321 scientists 238–247 publications: 260 scientists 248–257 publications: 280 scientists 258–267 publications: 240 scientists 268–277 publications: 214 scientists 278–287 publications: 242 scientists 288–297 publications: 203 scientists 298–307 publications: 166 scientists 308–317 publications: 154 scientists 318–327 publications: 175 scientists 328–337 publications: 159 scientists 338–347 publications: 99 scientists 348–357 publications: 131 scientists 358–367 publications: 106 scientists 368–377 publications: 118 scientists 378–387 publications: 97 scientists 388–397 publications: 108 scientists 398–407 publications: 82 scientists 408–417 publications: 71 scientists 418–427 publications: 64 scientists 428–437 publications: 55 scientists 438–447 publications: 54 scientists 448–457 publications: 60 scientists 458–467 publications: 47 scientists 468–477 publications: 40 scientists 478–487 publications: 30 scientists 488–497 publications: 29 scientists 498–507 publications: 38 scientists 508–517 publications: 40 scientists 518–527 publications: 32 scientists 528–537 publications: 23 scientists 538–547 publications: 28 scientists 548–557 publications: 23 scientists 558–567 publications: 19 scientists 568–577 publications: 16 scientists 578–587 publications: 17 scientists 588–597 publications: 18 scientists 598–607 publications: 22 scientists 608–617 publications: 15 scientists 618–627 publications: 9 scientists 628–637 publications: 11 scientists 638–647 publications: 21 scientists 648–657 publications: 12 scientists 658–667 publications: 9 scientists 668–677 publications: 11 scientists 678–687 publications: 9 scientists 688–697 publications: 6 scientists 698–707 publications: 14 scientists 708–717 publications: 7 scientists 718–727 publications: 8 scientists 728–737 publications: 10 scientists 738–747 publications: 9 scientists 748–757 publications: 5 scientists 758–767 publications: 5 scientists 768–777 publications: 11 scientists 778–787 publications: 7 scientists 788–797 publications: 2 scientists 798–803 publications: 4 scientists 804+ publications: 100 scientists
38 publications 804+

This scientist: 382 publications — 87th percentile

87% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 804 publications or more.

Philip E. Bourne D-index placement in Engineering and Technology in 2026

The chart shows the D-index (discipline H-index) distribution of Engineering and Technology scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026. The highlighted bar marks where Philip E. Bourne sits on this spectrum.

30 D-Index: 59 scientists 31 D-Index: 114 scientists 32 D-Index: 129 scientists 33 D-Index: 189 scientists 34 D-Index: 200 scientists 35 D-Index: 262 scientists 36 D-Index: 311 scientists 37 D-Index: 312 scientists 38 D-Index: 350 scientists 39 D-Index: 385 scientists 40 D-Index: 348 scientists 41 D-Index: 362 scientists 42 D-Index: 426 scientists 43 D-Index: 380 scientists 44 D-Index: 310 scientists 45 D-Index: 341 scientists 46 D-Index: 301 scientists 47 D-Index: 306 scientists 48 D-Index: 271 scientists 49 D-Index: 246 scientists 50 D-Index: 210 scientists 51 D-Index: 253 scientists 52 D-Index: 213 scientists 53 D-Index: 221 scientists 54 D-Index: 195 scientists 55 D-Index: 186 scientists 56 D-Index: 170 scientists 57 D-Index: 167 scientists 58 D-Index: 166 scientists 59 D-Index: 144 scientists 60 D-Index: 152 scientists 61 D-Index: 141 scientists 62 D-Index: 138 scientists 63 D-Index: 131 scientists 64 D-Index: 118 scientists 65 D-Index: 114 scientists 66 D-Index: 119 scientists 67 D-Index: 95 scientists 68 D-Index: 87 scientists 69 D-Index: 77 scientists 70 D-Index: 89 scientists 71 D-Index: 69 scientists 72 D-Index: 54 scientists 73 D-Index: 46 scientists 74 D-Index: 55 scientists 75 D-Index: 54 scientists 76 D-Index: 49 scientists 77 D-Index: 53 scientists 78 D-Index: 46 scientists 79 D-Index: 28 scientists 80 D-Index: 39 scientists 81 D-Index: 36 scientists 82 D-Index: 24 scientists 83 D-Index: 26 scientists 84 D-Index: 36 scientists 85 D-Index: 18 scientists 86 D-Index: 25 scientists 87 D-Index: 19 scientists 88 D-Index: 26 scientists 89 D-Index: 27 scientists 90 D-Index: 23 scientists 91 D-Index: 15 scientists 92 D-Index: 12 scientists 93 D-Index: 9 scientists 94 D-Index: 15 scientists 95 D-Index: 10 scientists 96 D-Index: 13 scientists 97 D-Index: 13 scientists 98 D-Index: 9 scientists 99 D-Index: 7 scientists 100 D-Index: 7 scientists 101 D-Index: 8 scientists 102 D-Index: 7 scientists 103 D-Index: 7 scientists 104 D-Index: 9 scientists 105 D-Index: 6 scientists 106 D-Index: 9 scientists 107+ D-Index: 99 scientists
30 D-Index 107+

This scientist: 77 D-Index — 94th percentile

94% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 107 D-Index or more.

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2018 - Fellow of the Indian National Academy of Engineering (INAE)

Overview

Philip E. Bourne is affiliated with the University of Virginia in the United States. Their research spans multiple areas within biochemistry, genetics, and molecular biology, with a particular focus on molecular biology as a subfield.

The scientist's work covers various topics including:

  • Computational Drug Discovery Methods
  • Protein Structure and Dynamics
  • Scientific Computing and Data Management
  • Genetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
  • COVID-19 Clinical Research Studies
  • Research Data Management Practices
  • Machine Learning in Bioinformatics

They have contributed significantly to scientific literature by publishing in several notable venues. Frequent publication venues include:

  • PLoS Computational Biology
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • International Journal of Social Sciences and Management Review
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)

Philip E. Bourne's research involves collaboration with several frequent co-authors such as Cameron Mura, Robert Preißner, Zheng Zhao, Saskia Preißner, and Eli J. Draizen.

Selected recent papers by the scientist include:

  • "IL-13 is a driver of COVID-19 severity," published in 2021 in JCI Insight
  • "Evidence for treatment with estradiol for women with SARS-CoV-2 infection," published in 2020 in BMC Medicine
  • "IL-13 is a driver of COVID-19 severity," published in 2020 in bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)
  • "Real-world evidence from over one million COVID-19 vaccinations is consistent with reactivation of the varicella-zoster virus," published in 2022 in Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
  • "Harnessing systematic protein-ligand interaction fingerprints for drug discovery," published in 2022 in Drug Discovery Today

Philip E. Bourne has been recognized with the award of Fellow of the Indian National Academy of Engineering (INAE) in 2018.

Best Publications

  • The Protein Data Bank

    Helen M. Berman;John D. Westbrook;Zukang Feng;Gary Gilliland

  • The Protein Data Bank.

    Helen M. Berman;Tammy Battistuz;T. N. Bhat;Wolfgang F. Bluhm

  • The Protein Data Bank, 1999–

    H. M. Berman;J. Westbrook;Z. Feng;G. L. Gilliland

  • The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship

    Mark D Wilkinson;Michel Dumontier;IJsbrand Jan Aalbersberg;Gabrielle Appleton

  • Protein Structure Alignment by Incremental Combinatorial Extension (CE) of the Optimal Path

    Ilya N. Shindyalov;Philip E. Bourne

  • Addendum: The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship

    Mark D. Wilkinson;Michel Dumontier;Ijsbrand Jan Aalbersberg;Gabrielle Appleton

  • ElliPro: a new structure-based tool for the prediction of antibody epitopes

    Julia V. Ponomarenko;Julia V. Ponomarenko;Huynh-Hoa Bui;Wei Li;Nicholas Fusseder

  • How open science helps researchers succeed.

    Erin C McKiernan;Philip E Bourne;C Titus Brown;Stuart Buck

  • The RCSB Protein Data Bank: redesigned web site and web services

    Peter W. Rose;Bojan Beran;Chunxiao Bi;Wolfgang F. Bluhm

  • SuperTarget and Matador: resources for exploring drug-target relationships

    Stefan Günther;Michael Kuhn;Mathias Dunkel;Monica Campillos

  • The Protein Data Bank and the challenge of structural genomics

    Helen M. Berman;T. N. Bhat;Philip E. Bourne;Zukang Feng

  • The RCSB Protein Data Bank: views of structural biology for basic and applied research and education

    Peter W. Rose;Andreas Prlić;Chunxiao Bi;Wolfgang F. Bluhm

  • The RCSB Protein Data Bank: new resources for research and education

    Peter W. Rose;Chunxiao Bi;Wolfgang F. Bluhm;Cole H. Christie

  • The RCSB PDB information portal for structural genomics

    Andrei Kouranov;Lei Xie;Joanna de la Cruz;Li Chen

  • Immune epitope database analysis resource

    Yohan Kim;Julia Ponomarenko;Zhanyang Zhu;Dorjee G. Tamang

  • The immune epitope database and analysis resource: from vision to blueprint.

    Bjoern Peters;John Sidney;Phil Bourne;Huynh-Hoa Bui

  • The RCSB Protein Data Bank: a redesigned query system and relational database based on the mmCIF schema

    Nita Deshpande;Kenneth J. Addess;Wolfgang F. Bluhm;Jeffrey C. Merino-Ott

  • Immune epitope database analysis resource (IEDB-AR).

    Qing Zhang;Peng Wang;Yohan Kim;Pernille Haste-Andersen

  • The Molecular Biology Toolkit (MBT): a modular platform for developing molecular visualization applications

    John L Moreland;Apostol Gramada;Oleksandr V Buzko;Qing Zhang

  • Drug discovery using chemical systems biology: repositioning the safe medicine Comtan to treat multi-drug and extensively drug resistant tuberculosis.

    Sarah L. Kinnings;Nina Liu;Nancy Buchmeier;Peter J. Tonge

  • Natural language processing of symptoms documented in free-text narratives of electronic health records: a systematic review

    Theresa A. Koleck;Caitlin N. Dreisbach;Philip E. Bourne;Suzanne Bakken

Frequent Co-Authors

Helen M. Berman
Helen M. Berman Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
John D. Westbrook
John D. Westbrook Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Andreas Prlić
Andreas Prlić Invitae (United States)
Gary L. Gilliland
Gary L. Gilliland National Institute of Standards and Technology
Jeremy H. Lakey
Jeremy H. Lakey Newcastle University
Alessandro Sette
Alessandro Sette La Jolla Institute For Allergy & Immunology
Nuno Bandeira
Nuno Bandeira University of California, San Diego
David S. Goodsell
David S. Goodsell Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Michael Gribskov
Michael Gribskov Purdue University West Lafayette
Patricia C. Babbitt
Patricia C. Babbitt University of California, San Francisco

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

Engineering and technology skills open up a world of flexible and in-demand career options. For students seeking online alternatives or wishing to broaden their professional scope, there are diverse degrees that pair well with or complement traditional engineering paths.

For example, an online degree in real estate equips graduates with analytical and technical skills valuable in property development, smart building technology, and urban planning. Creative minds might consider a ui/ux design bachelor's degree online, opening doors in digital product design—a growing field at the intersection of technology and user experience.

Those interested in leadership roles can explore what can i do with a project management degree. Project management skills are critical for overseeing engineering projects and ensuring their success within time and budget constraints.

Finally, technology-focused students may pursue a degree in cryptocurrency to gain insights into blockchain, fintech, and financial technologies—fields increasingly relevant in today's digital economy.

Best Scientists Citing Philip E. Bourne

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles