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

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 115 4527 4246 172 168 626 50425

Pim J. de Feyter publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Pim J. de Feyter between 1980 and 2017, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Pim J. de Feyter published across 38 years, from 1980 to 2017, averaging 16.6 papers a year. Output peaked at 51 publications in 2007. 5 of the 629 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
10 20 30 40 50
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1980 to 2017. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 51. Peak 51 publications in 2007. 1980: 1 publication 1981: 0 publications 1982: 1 publication 1983: 0 publications 1984: 1 publication 1985: 10 publications 1986: 10 publications 1987: 10 publications 1988: 12 publications 1989: 8 publications 1990: 20 publications 1991: 13 publications 1992: 13 publications 1993: 29 publications 1994: 21 publications 1995: 22 publications 1996: 15 publications 1997: 10 publications 1998: 6 publications 1999: 10 publications 2000: 9 publications 2001: 5 publications 2002: 24 publications 2003: 41 publications 2004: 45 publications 2005: 40 publications 2006: 44 publications 2007: 51 publications 2008: 36 publications 2009: 29 publications 2010: 17 publications 2011: 26 publications 2012: 12 publications 2013: 23 publications 2014: 6 publications 2015: 4 publications 2016: 3 publications 2017: 2 publications
1980 2017

629 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Pim J. de Feyter: publications per year, 1980 to 2017
Year Publications
1980 1
1981 0
1982 1
1983 0
1984 1
1985 10
1986 10
1987 10
1988 12
1989 8
1990 20
1991 13
1992 13
1993 29
1994 21
1995 22
1996 15
1997 10
1998 6
1999 10
2000 9
2001 5
2002 24
2003 41
2004 45
2005 40
2006 44
2007 51
2008 36
2009 29
2010 17
2011 26
2012 12
2013 23
2014 6
2015 4
2016 3
2017 2
Total 629
Download as CSV

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.

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, 621–640 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: 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.

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
621–640 386 626
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
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

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.

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, 114–115 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: 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.

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
114–115 393 115
116–117 318
118–119 302
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

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