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 95 10119 9496 971 927 1027 31070

Prokar Dasgupta publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Prokar Dasgupta between 1959 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Prokar Dasgupta published across 68 years, from 1959 to 2026, averaging 17 papers a year. Output peaked at 82 publications in 2020. 42 of the 1,154 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
20 40 60 80
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1959 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 82. Peak 82 publications in 2020. 1959: 1 publication 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: 0 publications 1990: 0 publications 1991: 0 publications 1992: 0 publications 1993: 0 publications 1994: 0 publications 1995: 0 publications 1996: 0 publications 1997: 4 publications 1998: 4 publications 1999: 0 publications 2000: 1 publication 2001: 2 publications 2002: 6 publications 2003: 11 publications 2004: 19 publications 2005: 35 publications 2006: 31 publications 2007: 41 publications 2008: 39 publications 2009: 27 publications 2010: 44 publications 2011: 56 publications 2012: 58 publications 2013: 67 publications 2014: 81 publications 2015: 66 publications 2016: 68 publications 2017: 69 publications 2018: 62 publications 2019: 54 publications 2020: 82 publications 2021: 56 publications 2022: 53 publications 2023: 26 publications 2024: 49 publications 2025: 41 publications 2026: 1 publication
1959 2026

1,154 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Prokar Dasgupta: publications per year, 1959 to 2026
Year Publications
1959 1
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 0
1990 0
1991 0
1992 0
1993 0
1994 0
1995 0
1996 0
1997 4
1998 4
1999 0
2000 1
2001 2
2002 6
2003 11
2004 19
2005 35
2006 31
2007 41
2008 39
2009 27
2010 44
2011 56
2012 58
2013 67
2014 81
2015 66
2016 68
2017 69
2018 62
2019 54
2020 82
2021 56
2022 53
2023 26
2024 49
2025 41
2026 1
Total 1,154
Download as CSV

Prokar Dasgupta 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 Prokar Dasgupta 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, 1,021–1,040 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: 1,027 publications — 95th percentile

95% 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
981–1,000 96
1,001–1,020 77
1,021–1,040 70 1,027
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

Prokar Dasgupta 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 Prokar Dasgupta 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, 94–95 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: 95 D-Index — 51st percentile

51% 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 95
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
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

Prokar Dasgupta is affiliated with King's College London in the United Kingdom and has an extensive publication record in the field of medicine, with specific contributions to surgery, pulmonary and respiratory medicine, oncology, biomedical engineering, and urology. Their work encompasses a variety of research topics including surgical simulation and training, prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment, bladder and urothelial cancer treatments, anatomy and medical technology, cardiac, anesthesia and surgical outcomes, renal cell carcinoma treatment, and urological disorders and treatments.

Among their recent papers are:

  • COVID-19 and urology: a comprehensive review of the literature, 2020, British Journal of Urology
  • Artificial intelligence and neural networks in urology: current clinical applications, 2020, Minerva Urologica e Nefrologica
  • Slowdown of urology residents' learning curve during the COVID-19 emergency, 2020, British Journal of Urology
  • A systematic review of simulation-based training tools for technical and non-technical skills in ophthalmology, 2020, Eye
  • Depression, anxiety, and suicidality in patients with prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies, 2020, Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases

Dasgupta frequently collaborates with other researchers, with notable co-authors including Kamran Ahmed, Ben Challacombe, Nicholas Raison, Abdüllatif Aydın, and Alexandre Mottrie.

Their research outputs have been published widely in multiple venues, predominantly in the following journals:

  • British Journal of Urology
  • The Journal of Urology
  • European Urology Open Science
  • Journal of Robotic Surgery
  • arXiv (Cornell University)

Their academic portfolio reflects a specialized focus on surgery-related medical research, with 166 publications in surgery alone, and a strong presence in pulmonary and respiratory medicine. Their interest and expertise extend to oncology and biomedical engineering, reflecting a multidisciplinary approach to medical science and urology.

Best Publications

  • State-of-the-Art in Force and Tactile Sensing for Minimally Invasive Surgery

    P. Puangmali;K. Althoefer;L.D. Seneviratne;D. Murphy

  • DECREASED SENSORY RECEPTORS P2X3 AND TRPV1 IN SUBUROTHELIAL NERVE FIBERS FOLLOWING INTRADETRUSOR INJECTIONS OF BOTULINUM TOXIN FOR HUMAN DETRUSOR OVERACTIVITY

    A. Apostolidis;R. Popat;Y. Yiangou;D. Cockayne

  • Proposed Mechanism for the Efficacy of Injected Botulinum Toxin in the Treatment of Human Detrusor Overactivity

    Apostolos Apostolidis;Prokar Dasgupta;Clare J. Fowler

  • Efficacy of Botulinum Toxin-A for Treating Idiopathic Detrusor Overactivity: Results From a Single Center, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo Controlled Trial

    Arun Sahai;Mohammad Shamim Khan;Prokar Dasgupta

  • Recommendations on the use of botulinum toxin in the treatment of lower urinary tract disorders and pelvic floor dysfunctions: a European consensus report.

    Apostolos Apostolidis;Prokar Dasgupta;Pierre Denys;Sohier Elneil

  • A Single-centre Early Phase Randomised Controlled Three-arm Trial of Open, Robotic, and Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy (CORAL).

    Muhammad Shamim Khan;Muhammad Shamim Khan;Christine Gan;Kamran Ahmed;Ahmad Fahim Ismail

  • Urinary tract infections: new insights into a common problem

    R Kucheria;P Dasgupta;S H Sacks;M S Khan

  • A comparison between the response of patients with idiopathic detrusor overactivity and neurogenic detrusor overactivity to the first intradetrusor injection of botulinum-A toxin.

    Roshni Popat;Apostolos Apostolidis;Vinay Kalsi;Gwendoline Gonzales

  • Current status of validation for robotic surgery simulators – a systematic review

    Hamid Abboudi;Mohammad Shamim Khan;Omar Aboumarzouk;Khurshid A. Guru

  • Analysis of intracorporeal compared with extracorporeal urinary diversion after robot-assisted radical cystectomy: results from the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium.

    Kamran Ahmed;Shahid A. Khan;Matthew H. Hayn;Piyush K. Agarwal

  • Miniature 3-Axis Distal Force Sensor for Minimally Invasive Surgical Palpation

    P. Puangmali;Hongbin Liu;L. D. Seneviratne;P. Dasgupta

  • Future of robotic surgery in urology.

    Jens J. Rassweiler;Riccardo Autorino;Jan Klein;Alex Mottrie

  • Kinematic design considerations for minimally invasive surgical robots: an overview.

    Chin-Hsing Kuo;Jian S. Dai;Prokar Dasgupta

  • Contemporary Management of Lower Urinary Tract Disease With Botulinum Toxin A: A Systematic Review of Botox (OnabotulinumtoxinA) and Dysport (AbobotulinumtoxinA)

    Altaf Mangera;Karl-Erik Andersson;Apostolos Apostolidis;Chris Chapple

  • The learning curve of robot-assisted radical cystectomy: Results from the international robotic cystectomy consortium

    Matthew H. Hayn;Abid Hussain;Ahmed M. Mansour;Paul E. Andrews

  • Robot-assisted Versus Open Radical Prostatectomy: A Contemporary Analysis of an All-payer Discharge Database.

    Jeffrey J. Leow;Steven L. Chang;Christian P. Meyer;Ye Wang

  • Measuring the surgical ‘learning curve’: methods, variables and competency

    Nuzhath Khan;Hamid Abboudi;Mohammed Shamim Khan;Prokar Dasgupta

  • Learning curves for urological procedures: a systematic review

    Hamid Abboudi;Mohammed Shamim Khan;Khurshid A. Guru;Saied Froghi

  • Recent advances in the diagnosis and treatment of bladder cancer

    Grace Cheung;Arun Sahai;Michele Billia;Prokar Dasgupta

  • Urodynamic results and clinical outcomes with intradetrusor injections of onabotulinumtoxina in a randomized, placebo-controlled dose-finding study in idiopathic overactive bladder†‡

    Eric Rovner;Michael Kennelly;Heinrich Schulte-Baukloh;Jihao Zhou;Jihao Zhou

Frequent Co-Authors

Declan G. Murphy
Declan G. Murphy King's College London
Kaspar Althoefer
Kaspar Althoefer Queen Mary University of London
Lakmal Seneviratne
Lakmal Seneviratne Khalifa University
Mani Menon
Mani Menon Henry Ford Hospital
Francesco Porpiglia
Francesco Porpiglia University of Turin
Inderbir S. Gill
Inderbir S. Gill University of Southern California
Henk G. van der Poel
Henk G. van der Poel Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital
Giacomo Novara
Giacomo Novara University of Padua
Clare J. Fowler
Clare J. Fowler University College London
Adam S. Kibel
Adam S. Kibel Brigham and Women'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

The landscape of medical education in the USA is rapidly evolving, with online degrees creating new entry points and career advancement opportunities. For aspiring nurses, online lpn programs offer fast-track options to start working in healthcare, often allowing you to study at your own pace.

Registered nurses looking to further their education may be interested in rn bsn online programs no clinicals. These flexible programs are ideal for working professionals and can help open doors to more advanced roles.

For those holding a master’s degree in nursing, the demand for highly qualified practitioners is growing. The shortest post master's dnp program options allow you to accelerate your pathway to a terminal nursing degree. Alternatively, a variety of online dnp programs exist to support nurses in achieving leadership positions without sacrificing job stability.

As these pathways expand, students should research program accreditation, time commitment, and career objectives to ensure the best fit for their future in medicine.

Best Scientists Citing Prokar Dasgupta

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles