World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
105
Citations
40349
World Ranking
6778
National Ranking
3578

Richard J. Barohn 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 Richard J. Barohn 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: 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 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 507 publications — 59th percentile

59% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Richard J. Barohn 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 Richard J. Barohn 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: 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 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 105 D-Index — 67th percentile

67% 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

  • Member of the Association of American Physicians
  • Member of the Association of American Physicians
  • Member of the Association of American Physicians

Overview

Richard J. Barohn is affiliated with the University of Missouri in the United States. Their research primarily focuses on the field of Medicine, with a significant emphasis on Neurology, Genetics, Molecular Biology, Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience, and Physiology. Barohn's work spans various aspects of neurological and muscular disorders.

The scientist has contributed to multiple areas of study including Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research, Neurogenetic and Muscular Disorders Research, Peripheral Neuropathies and Disorders, Hereditary Neurological Disorders, Muscle Physiology and Disorders, Genetic Neurodegenerative Diseases, and Pain Mechanisms and Treatments.

Barohn has published in several journals frequently, including:

  • RRNMF Neuromuscular Journal (12 publications)
  • Neurologic Clinics (8 publications)
  • Neurology (7 publications)
  • Muscle & Nerve (4 publications)
  • Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis and Frontotemporal Degeneration (3 publications)

Notable recent papers featuring their contributions include:

  • "Primary lateral sclerosis: consensus diagnostic criteria," 2020, Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
  • "Validation of serum neurofilaments as prognostic and potential pharmacodynamic biomarkers for ALS," 2020, Neurology
  • "Effect of Different Corticosteroid Dosing Regimens on Clinical Outcomes in Boys With Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy," 2022, JAMA
  • "Guidelines on clinical presentation and management of nondystrophic myotonias," 2020, Muscle & Nerve
  • "Meta-analyses of ataluren randomized controlled trials in nonsense mutation Duchenne muscular dystrophy," 2020, Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research

Frequent collaborators in Barohn's work include Mazen M. Dimachkie, Jeffrey Statland, Omar Jawdat, Mamatha Pasnoor, and Laura Herbelin, who have contributed to numerous joint publications.

The scientist is recognized as a member of the Association of American Physicians. Their work continues to contribute to advancing understanding in neurological and neuromuscular disorders.

Best Publications

  • Myasthenia gravis: Recommendations for clinical research standards

    A. Jaretzki;R.J. Barohn;R.M. Ernstoff

  • 2017 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology classification criteria for adult and juvenile idiopathic inflammatory myopathies and their major subgroups

    Ingrid E Lundberg;Anna Tjärnlund;Matteo Bottai;Victoria P Werth

  • Mutations in Kir2.1 cause the developmental and episodic electrical phenotypes of Andersen's syndrome

    Nikki M. Plaster;Rabi Tawil;Martin Tristani-Firouzi;Sonia Canún

  • 2017 European League Against Rheumatism/American College of Rheumatology Classification Criteria for Adult and Juvenile Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies and Their Major Subgroups.

    Ingrid E Lundberg;Anna Tjärnlund;Matteo Bottai;Victoria P Werth

  • Safety and efficacy of eculizumab in anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody-positive refractory generalised myasthenia gravis (REGAIN): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study

    James F Howard;Kimiaki Utsugisawa;Michael Benatar;Hiroyuki Murai

  • Myasthenia gravis: recommendations for clinical research standards. Task Force of the Medical Scientific Advisory Board of the Myasthenia Gravis Foundation of America.

    Alfred Jaretzki;Richard J. Barohn;Raina M. Ernstoff;Henry J. Kaminski

  • Efficacy of minocycline in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a phase III randomised trial

    Paul H Gordon;Dan H Moore;Robert G Miller;Julaine M Florence

  • Chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy. Clinical characteristics, course, and recommendations for diagnostic criteria

    Richard J. Barohn;John T. Kissel;John R. Warmolts;Jerry R. Mendell

  • Practice parameter: Thymectomy for autoimmune myasthenia gravis (an evidence-based review) Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

    Gary S. Gronseth;Richard J. Barohn

  • Genome-wide Analyses Identify KIF5A as a Novel ALS Gene.

    Aude Nicolas;Kevin P. Kenna;Alan E. Renton;Alan E. Renton;Nicola Ticozzi

  • Rituximab in the Treatment of Refractory Adult and Juvenile Dermatomyositis and Adult Polymyositis: A Randomized, Placebo-phase Trial

    Chester V. Oddis;Ann M. Reed;Rohit Aggarwal;Lisa G. Rider

  • Interferon‐α/β–mediated innate immune mechanisms in dermatomyositis

    Steven A. Greenberg;Jack L. Pinkus;Geraldine S. Pinkus;Travis Burleson

  • A Phase I/II trial of MYO-029 in Adult Subjects with Muscular Dystrophy

    Kathryn R. Wagner;James L. Fleckenstein;Anthony A. Amato;Richard J. Barohn

  • Clinical spectrum of chronic acquired demyelinating polyneuropathies.

    David S. Saperstein;Jonathan S. Katz;Anthony A. Amato;Richard J. Barohn

  • Ataluren treatment of patients with nonsense mutation dystrophinopathy

    Katharine Bushby;Richard Finkel;Brenda Wong;Richard Barohn

  • Practice parameter: Immunotherapy for Guillain-Barré syndrome: Report of the Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology

    R.A.C. Hughes;E.F.M. Wijdicks;R. Barohn;E. Benson

  • Guillain-Barré Syndrome and Variants

    Mazen M. Dimachkie;Richard J. Barohn

  • Myasthenia gravis activities of daily living profile.

    Gil I. Wolfe;L. Herbelin;Sharon P Nations;B. Foster

  • Ataluren in patients with nonsense mutation Duchenne muscular dystrophy (ACT DMD): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

    Craig M McDonald;Craig Campbell;Ricardo Erazo Torricelli;Richard S Finkel;Richard S Finkel

  • Mutations in Kir2.1 cause the developmental and episodic electrical phenotypes of Andersen's Syndrome

    N Plaster;R Tawil;M Tristani-Firouzi;S Canun

Frequent Co-Authors

Anthony A. Amato
Anthony A. Amato Claude Bernard University Lyon 1
John T. Kissel
John T. Kissel The Ohio State University
Robert G. Miller
Robert G. Miller California Pacific Medical Center
Alan Pestronk
Alan Pestronk Washington University in St. Louis
Robert C. Griggs
Robert C. Griggs University of Rochester Medical Center
Michael G. Hanna
Michael G. Hanna University College London
Jerry R. Mendell
Jerry R. Mendell The Ohio State University
Volker Straub
Volker Straub Newcastle University
Gareth Parry
Gareth Parry Freeman Hospital
Gary S. Gronseth
Gary S. Gronseth University of Kansas

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 medical careers in the USA goes beyond traditional medicine degrees. Many students consider alternative health pathways—especially online options—to enter the healthcare field more quickly or flexibly.

For non-nursing majors interested in pivoting to nursing, direct entry msn programs for non-nursing majors provide a fast-tracked route to an advanced nursing credential. These programs are ideal for career changers and anyone wishing to make a swift transition into advanced nursing roles.

If you’re looking for programs with less competitive admissions, understanding what is the easiest nursing program to get into can help you plan your educational journey with realistic expectations.

For those less interested in direct patient care, pursuing a non-clinical career with medical billing and coding schools online offers excellent opportunities—often with flexible schedules and the possibility for remote work.

Prospective nursing students may also ask: do i need to take the teas test for lpn? Some nursing schools have eliminated these standardized test requirements, making entry into nursing programs more accessible.

Best Scientists Citing Richard J. Barohn

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles