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 80 16926 15916 8490 7850 290 32341

Richard M. Frankel publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Richard M. Frankel between 1982 and 2026, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Richard M. Frankel published across 45 years, from 1982 to 2026, averaging 8 papers a year. Output peaked at 20 publications in 2017. 3 of the 359 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1982 to 2026. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 20. Peak 20 publications in 2017. 1982: 1 publication 1983: 0 publications 1984: 3 publications 1985: 1 publication 1986: 1 publication 1987: 0 publications 1988: 1 publication 1989: 1 publication 1990: 1 publication 1991: 2 publications 1992: 2 publications 1993: 5 publications 1994: 3 publications 1995: 5 publications 1996: 2 publications 1997: 10 publications 1998: 8 publications 1999: 3 publications 2000: 9 publications 2001: 11 publications 2002: 9 publications 2003: 9 publications 2004: 13 publications 2005: 10 publications 2006: 14 publications 2007: 7 publications 2008: 17 publications 2009: 15 publications 2010: 14 publications 2011: 17 publications 2012: 7 publications 2013: 18 publications 2014: 18 publications 2015: 10 publications 2016: 16 publications 2017: 20 publications 2018: 15 publications 2019: 15 publications 2020: 13 publications 2021: 14 publications 2022: 1 publication 2023: 3 publications 2024: 12 publications 2025: 2 publications 2026: 1 publication
1982 2026

359 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Richard M. Frankel: publications per year, 1982 to 2026
Year Publications
1982 1
1983 0
1984 3
1985 1
1986 1
1987 0
1988 1
1989 1
1990 1
1991 2
1992 2
1993 5
1994 3
1995 5
1996 2
1997 10
1998 8
1999 3
2000 9
2001 11
2002 9
2003 9
2004 13
2005 10
2006 14
2007 7
2008 17
2009 15
2010 14
2011 17
2012 7
2013 18
2014 18
2015 10
2016 16
2017 20
2018 15
2019 15
2020 13
2021 14
2022 1
2023 3
2024 12
2025 2
2026 1
Total 359
Download as CSV

Richard M. Frankel 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 M. Frankel 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, 281–300 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: 290 publications — 15th percentile

15% 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
281–300 768 290
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
1,041–1,060 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

Richard M. Frankel 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 M. Frankel 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, 80–81 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: 80 D-Index — 16th percentile

16% 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 80
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
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

Richard M. Frankel is affiliated with Washington University in St. Louis in the United States. Their research primarily spans the fields of Business, Management and Accounting, as well as Economics, Econometrics and Finance. Within these main areas, their subfields of study include Accounting, Finance, Strategy and Management, Economics and Econometrics, and Management Science and Operations Research.

Their scholarly contributions focus on several primary topics such as Financial Markets and Investment Strategies, Auditing, Earnings Management, Governance, Financial Reporting and Valuation Research, Corporate Finance and Governance, Banking stability, regulation, efficiency, Islamic Finance and Banking Studies, and Forecasting Techniques and Applications.

Richard M. Frankel has collaborated frequently with several co-authors, including Xiumin Martin, Bong Hwan Kim, Tao Ma, Aneesh Raghunandan, and Bright Gershion Godigbe, reflecting ongoing partnerships in their research endeavors.

The scientist has published extensively in multiple academic venues. The most frequent platforms include:

  • SSRN Electronic Journal
  • Management Science
  • BMC Primary Care
  • Contemporary Accounting Research
  • Review of Accounting Studies

Some recent papers authored by Richard M. Frankel demonstrate their sustained contributions to the field:

  • "Disclosure Sentiment: Machine Learning vs. Dictionary Methods" (2021, Management Science)
  • "Bank Monitoring and Financial Reporting Quality: The Case of Accounts Receivable-Based Loans*" (2020, Contemporary Accounting Research)
  • "The Economics of ESG Disclosure Regulation" (2023, SSRN Electronic Journal)

Additional recent publications where Frankel is co-author or referenced include work on health care documentation and SPAC disclosures, illustrating engagement with interdisciplinary topics.

Overall, the research activities of Richard M. Frankel cover a diverse array of themes within accounting and finance, supported by repeated contributions in high-impact journals and collaboration with multiple researchers. This body of work aligns with evolving areas in governance, financial reporting, and regulatory impacts in finance.

Best Publications

  • The Relation between Auditors' Fees for Nonaudit Services and Earnings Management

    Richard M. Frankel;Marilyn F. Johnson;Karen K. Nelson

  • Physician-Patient Communication: The Relationship With Malpractice Claims Among Primary Care Physicians and Surgeons

    Wendy Levinson;Debra L. Roter;John P. Mullooly;Valerie T. Dull

  • The Effect of Physician Behavior on the Collection of Data

    Howard B. Beckman;Richard M. Frankel

  • Study design in qualitative research--2: Sampling and data collection strategies.

    Kelly J. Devers;Richard M. Frankel

  • The Doctor-Patient Relationship and Malpractice: Lessons From Plaintiff Depositions

    Howard B. Beckman;Kathryn M. Markakis;Anthony L. Suchman;Richard M. Frankel

  • A Model of Empathic Communication in the Medical Interview

    Anthony L. Suchman;Kathryn Markakis;Howard B. Beckman;Richard Frankel

  • The Relation between Auditors' Fees for Non-Audit Services and Earnings Management

    Richard M. Frankel;Marilyn F. Johnson;Karen K. Nelson

  • Assessing competence in communication and interpersonal skills: the Kalamazoo II report.

    F. Daniel Duffy;Geoffrey H. Gordon;Gerald Whelan;Kathy Cole-Kelly

  • An empirical examination of conference calls as a voluntary disclosure medium

    Richard Frankel;Marilyn Johnson;Douglas J. Skinner

  • Patient-Clinician Communication: American Society of Clinical Oncology Consensus Guideline

    Timothy Gilligan;Nessa Coyle;Richard M. Frankel;Donna L. Berry

  • Lost in translation: challenges and opportunities in physician-to-physician communication during patient handoffs.

    Darrell J. Solet;J. Michael Norvell;Gale H. Rutan;Gale H. Rutan;Richard M. Frankel

  • Communication interventions make a difference in conversations between physicians and patients: a systematic review of the evidence.

    Jaya K Rao;Lynda A Anderson;Thomas S Inui;Richard M Frankel

  • The expression of emotion through nonverbal behavior in medical visits. Mechanisms and outcomes.

    Debra L. Roter;Richard M. Frankel;Judith A. Hall;David Sluyter

  • Communication Skills Training for Physicians Improves Patient Satisfaction

    MA Adrienne Boissy Md;Amy K. Windover;Dan Bokar;Matthew Karafa

  • “Let Me See If I Have This Right …”: Words That Help Build Empathy

    John L. Coulehan;Frederic W. Platt;Barry Egener;Richard Frankel

  • Study design in Qualitative research - 1: Developing questions and assessing resource needs

    Richard M. Frankel;Kelly J. Devers

  • Getting the Most out of the Clinical Encounter: The Four Habits Model

    Richard Frankel

  • From sentence to sequence: Understanding the medical encounter through microinteractional analysis

    Richard M. Frankel

  • Helping medical school faculty realize their dreams: an innovative, collaborative mentoring program.

    Linda H. Pololi;Sharon M. Knight;Kay Dennis;Kay Dennis;Richard M. Frankel

  • Medical student gender and issues of confidence

    Danielle C. Blanch;Judith A. Hall;Debra L. Roter;Richard M. Frankel

Frequent Co-Authors

Debra L. Roter
Debra L. Roter Johns Hopkins University
Xiumin Martin
Xiumin Martin Washington University in St. Louis
Wendy Levinson
Wendy Levinson University of Toronto
Thomas S. Inui
Thomas S. Inui Indiana University
Judith A. Hall
Judith A. Hall Northeastern University
Edward Krupat
Edward Krupat Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Robert C. Smith
Robert C. Smith Michigan State University
John Hsu
John Hsu Harvard University
Paul Haidet
Paul Haidet Pennsylvania State University

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 a career in medicine goes beyond traditional MD programs. Many healthcare professionals pursue advanced online degrees to specialize or move into leadership roles. For nurses aiming to provide specialized mental healthcare, the fastest post master's pmhnp programs offer a streamlined route to psychiatric mental health nurse practitioner certification.

For those interested in healthcare management, pursuing the cheapest online healthcare administration degree can open doors to administrative positions while being budget-friendly. Advancement opportunities also exist through most affordable mha programs, which prepare graduates for high-level management or executive roles in the healthcare sector.

If you're a nurse looking to reach the pinnacle of clinical practice, consider enrolling in cheap dnp online programs. These Doctor of Nursing Practice degrees help position you for leadership or advanced specialist roles, all with flexible online formats suited to working professionals.

By exploring these related online opportunities, you can shape a rewarding pathway in the healthcare field while balancing flexibility, affordability, and career growth.

Best Scientists Citing Richard M. Frankel

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles