World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Award Badge
Medicine
Netherlands
2023

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
115
Citations
50425
World Ranking
4527
National Ranking
172

Pim J. de Feyter 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 Pim J. de Feyter 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: 626 publications — 74th percentile

74% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Pim J. de Feyter 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 Pim J. de Feyter 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: 115 D-Index — 78th percentile

78% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 2023 - Research.com Medicine in Netherlands Leader Award

Overview

Pim J. de Feyter is affiliated with Erasmus University Rotterdam in the Netherlands. Their academic career is rooted in one of Europe's notable institutions, contributing to research activities recognized within the region.

While specific recent papers, co-authors, and book publications are not listed, Pim J. de Feyter's profile indicates active scholarly involvement. The absence of detailed publication data and frequent co-authors suggests either a developing or selective publication record available publicly.

Details concerning main fields of study, subfields, and core research topics are not provided. However, this lack of data does not preclude engagement in diverse or interdisciplinary approaches typical of researchers associated with Erasmus University Rotterdam.

The scientist has not been recorded as a recipient of awards, which may reflect a focus on ongoing research and scholarship rather than on recognition through formal accolades at this stage.

Public documentation confirms Pim J. de Feyter is currently living. This implies they may continue contributing to their field and may expand their scholarly footprint in future research outputs or collaborative projects.

Best Publications

  • Reliable noninvasive coronary angiography with fast submillimeter multislice spiral computed tomography

    Koen Nieman;Filippo Cademartiri;Pedro A. Lemos;Rolf Raaijmakers

  • Diagnostic accuracy of 64-slice computed tomography coronary angiography: a prospective, multicenter, multivendor study.

    W. Bob Meijboom;Matthijs F.L. Meijs;Joanne D. Schuijf;Maarten J. Cramer

  • Management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation

    Micheal E. Bertrand;Maarten L. Simoons;Keith A.A. Fox;Lars C. Wallentin

  • High-resolution spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients referred for diagnostic conventional coronary angiography.

    Nico R. Mollet;Filippo Cademartiri;Carlos A.G. van Mieghem;Giuseppe Runza

  • Bivalirudin and Provisional Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Blockade Compared With Heparin and Planned Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Blockade During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: REPLACE-2 Randomized Trial

    A. Michael Lincoff;John A. Bittl;Robert A. Harrington;Frederick Feit

  • Coronary angiography with multi-slice computed tomography

    Koen Nieman;Matthijs Oudkerk;Benno Rensing;Peter van Ooijen

  • Fluvastatin for prevention of cardiac events following successful first percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomized controlled trial.

    Patrick W. J. C. Serruys;Pim de Feyter;Carlos Macaya;Norbert Kokott

  • Comprehensive Assessment of Coronary Artery Stenoses : Computed Tomography Coronary Angiography Versus Conventional Coronary Angiography and Correlation With Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stable Angina

    W. Bob Meijboom;Carlos A.G. Van Mieghem;Niels van Pelt;Annick Weustink

  • Unrestricted Utilization of Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Compared With Conventional Bare Stent Implantation in the “Real World” The Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) Registry

    Pedro A. Lemos;Patrick W. Serruys;Ron T. van Domburg;Francesco Saia

  • Endothelial Progenitor Cell Capture by Stents Coated With Antibody Against CD34 : The HEALING-FIM (Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth-First In Man) Registry

    Jiro Aoki;Patrick W. Serruys;Heleen van Beusekom;Andrew T.L. Ong

  • Cardiac computed tomography: Indications, applications, limitations, and training requirements - Report of a Writing Group deployed by the Working Group Nuclear Cardiology and Cardiac CT of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Council of Nuclear Cardiology

    Stephen Schroeder;Stephan Achenbach;Frank Bengel;Christof Burgstahler

  • Thirty-day incidence and six-month clinical outcome of thrombotic stent occlusion after bare-metal, sirolimus, or paclitaxel stent implantation

    Andrew T.L. Ong;Angela Hoye;Jiro Aoki;Carlos A.G. van Mieghem

  • Multislice spiral computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with stable angina pectoris

    Nico R Mollet;Filippo Cademartiri;Koen Nieman;Francesco Saia

  • A clinical prediction rule for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease: validation, updating, and extension.

    Tessa S S Genders;Ewout W Steyerberg;Hatem Alkadhi;Sebastian Leschka

  • Long-term efficacy of bivalirudin and provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade vs heparin and planned glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade during percutaneous coronary revascularization: REPLACE-2 randomized trial.

    A. Michael Lincoff;Neal S. Kleiman;Dean J. Kereiakes;Frederick Feit

  • Intravascular ultrasound findings in the multicenter, randomized, double-blind RAVEL (RAndomized study with the sirolimus-eluting VElocity balloon-expandable stent in the treatment of patients with de novo native coronary artery Lesions) trial.

    Patrick W. Serruys;Muzaffer Degertekin;Kengo Tanabe;Alexandre Abizaid

  • Indication of long-term endothelial dysfunction after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation

    Sjoerd H. Hofma;Wim J. van der Giessen;Bas M. van Dalen;Pedro A. Lemos

  • Short- and Long-Term Clinical Outcome After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for the Percutaneous Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Insights From the Rapamycin-Eluting and Taxus Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital Registries (RESEARCH and T-SEARCH)

    Marco Valgimigli;Carlos A.G. van Mieghem;Andrew T.L. Ong;Jiro Aoki

  • TAXUS III Trial: in-stent restenosis treated with stent-based delivery of paclitaxel incorporated in a slow-release polymer formulation.

    Kengo Tanabe;Patrick W. Serruys;Eberhard Grube;Pieter C. Smits

  • Management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation The Task Force on the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes of the European Society of Cardiology*

    Michel E. Bertrand;Maarten L. Simoons;Keith A. A. Fox;Lars C. Wallentin

Frequent Co-Authors

Patrick W. Serruys
Patrick W. Serruys University of Galway
Gabriel P. Krestin
Gabriel P. Krestin Erasmus University Rotterdam
Filippo Cademartiri
Filippo Cademartiri Fondazione Monasterio
Koen Nieman
Koen Nieman Stanford University
Peter de Jaegere
Peter de Jaegere Erasmus University Rotterdam
Ron T. van Domburg
Ron T. van Domburg Erasmus University Rotterdam
Eugene P. McFadden
Eugene P. McFadden Cork University Hospital
Pedro A. Lemos
Pedro A. Lemos Universidade de São Paulo
Robert-Jan van Geuns
Robert-Jan van Geuns Radboud University
Evelyn Regar
Evelyn Regar University of Zurich

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

If you’re considering a healthcare career or a stepping stone toward studying Medicine in the USA, there are several accessible online pathways to explore. One popular route for non-nurses is enrolling in entry level msn programs online. These programs allow students with a bachelor’s in any field to transition into nursing at the graduate level, opening new opportunities in patient care and management.

For those seeking a quicker entry into nursing, online adn programs (Associate Degree in Nursing) provide a streamlined path to becoming a registered nurse. Some schools offer flexibility in admissions, making it easier to start your nursing journey.

Alternatively, if your interest lies in healthcare administration, medical billing and coding schools online with financial aid offer accredited programs focusing on essential behind-the-scenes operations. These roles are critical for ensuring smooth hospital and clinic operations.

Worried about entrance exams? Not all nursing pathways require them; for example, you might ask, do all nursing schools require the teas? Many schools waive these exams, making it easier to start your academic journey.

Best Scientists Citing Pim J. de Feyter

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles