World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Roman Jaeschke

Roman Jaeschke

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking Current World Ranking National Ranking Current National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 103 7142 6705 275 261 261 138141

Roman Jaeschke publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Roman Jaeschke between 1987 and 2025, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Roman Jaeschke published across 39 years, from 1987 to 2025, averaging 6.9 papers a year. Output peaked at 19 publications in 2013. 2 of the 268 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1987 to 2025. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 19. Peak 19 publications in 2013. 1987: 1 publication 1988: 0 publications 1989: 4 publications 1990: 8 publications 1991: 4 publications 1992: 8 publications 1993: 6 publications 1994: 12 publications 1995: 12 publications 1996: 1 publication 1997: 4 publications 1998: 4 publications 1999: 2 publications 2000: 5 publications 2001: 3 publications 2002: 4 publications 2003: 5 publications 2004: 8 publications 2005: 6 publications 2006: 3 publications 2007: 7 publications 2008: 15 publications 2009: 13 publications 2010: 2 publications 2011: 11 publications 2012: 14 publications 2013: 19 publications 2014: 11 publications 2015: 9 publications 2016: 18 publications 2017: 11 publications 2018: 7 publications 2019: 11 publications 2020: 11 publications 2021: 7 publications 2022: 0 publications 2023: 0 publications 2024: 0 publications 2025: 2 publications
1987 2025

268 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Roman Jaeschke: publications per year, 1987 to 2025
Year Publications
1987 1
1988 0
1989 4
1990 8
1991 4
1992 8
1993 6
1994 12
1995 12
1996 1
1997 4
1998 4
1999 2
2000 5
2001 3
2002 4
2003 5
2004 8
2005 6
2006 3
2007 7
2008 15
2009 13
2010 2
2011 11
2012 14
2013 19
2014 11
2015 9
2016 18
2017 11
2018 7
2019 11
2020 11
2021 7
2022 0
2023 0
2024 0
2025 2
Total 268
Download as CSV

Roman Jaeschke 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 Roman Jaeschke 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, 261–280 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: 261 publications — 10th percentile

10% 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
261–280 722 261
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
1,041–1,060 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

Roman Jaeschke 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 Roman Jaeschke 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, 102–103 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: 103 D-Index — 65th percentile

65% 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
102–103 630 103
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

Roman Jaeschke is a researcher affiliated with McMaster University in Canada. Their work primarily spans the fields of Medicine and Health Professions, focusing on topics related to palliative care, airway management, and intensive care environments.

The main topics addressed in Jaeschke's research include:

  • Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Airway Management and Intubation Techniques
  • Family and Patient Care in Intensive Care Units
  • Grief, Bereavement, and Mental Health
  • Tracheal and Airway Disorders
  • Dysphagia Assessment and Management
  • Child and Adolescent Health

Their published papers cover a range of clinical and healthcare service themes. Notable recent publications include:

  • Scale-up and sustainability of a personalized end-of-life care intervention: a longitudinal mixed-methods study, 2021, BMC Health Services Research
  • The cuff leak test in critically ill patients: An international survey of intensivists, 2021, Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
  • Rapid Response Teams-Rethinking Expectations, 2020, Critical Care Medicine
  • Cuff leak test and airway obstruction in mechanically ventilated ICU patients (COSMIC): a pilot feasibility randomized controlled trial protocol, 2025, BMJ Open
  • Convalescent Plasma in COVID-19, 2020, Saudi Journal of Medicine and Medical Sciences

Jaeschke collaborates frequently with several coauthors, including Waleed Alhazzani, Dan Perri, Erick Duan, Richard J. Cook, and Alyson Takaoka, demonstrating a collaborative research approach across multiple studies.

The researcher's work appears in diverse peer-reviewed venues, reflecting interdisciplinary interests within clinical medicine and health services research. Key publication outlets include:

  • BMC Health Services Research
  • Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
  • Critical Care Medicine
  • BMJ Open
  • Saudi Journal of Medicine and Medical Sciences

The subfields covered by Jaeschke's work extend into various specialized areas of health:

  • General Health Professions
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine

This combination of clinical practice and health services research highlights multi-dimensional expertise focused on improving patient care, particularly in critical and end-of-life care settings.

Best Publications

  • Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012.

    Dellinger Rp;Levy Mm;Rhodes A;Annane D

  • Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock, 2012

    R. Phillip Dellinger;Mitchell M. Levy;Andrew Rhodes;Djillali Annane

  • Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

    R. Phillip Dellinger;Mitchell M. Levy;Jean M. Carlet;Julian Bion

  • GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables

    Gordon Guyatt;Andrew D Oxman;Elie A Akl;Regina Kunz

  • Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

    David Atkins;Dana Best;Peter A Briss;Martin Eccles

  • Measurement of health status: Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference

    Roman Jaeschke;Joel Singer;Gordon H. Guyatt

  • Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Pain, Agitation, and Delirium in Adult Patients in the Intensive Care Unit

    Juliana Barr;Gilles L. Fraser;Kathleen Puntillo;E. Wesley Ely

  • Evidence-Based Medicine: A New Approach to Teaching the Practice of Medicine

    Gordon Guyatt;John Cairns;David Churchill;Deborah Cook

  • Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: III. How to Use an Article About a Diagnostic Test: B. What Are the Results and Will They Help Me In Caring for My Patients?

    Roman Jaeschke;Gordon H. Guyatt;David L. Sackett

  • Users' guides to the medical literature. III. How to use an article about a diagnostic test. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group.

    Jaeschke R;Guyatt Gh;Sackett Dl

  • GRADE guidelines: 6. Rating the quality of evidence-imprecision

    Gordon H. Guyatt;Andrew D. Oxman;Regina Kunz;Jan Brozek

  • GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency

    Gordon H. Guyatt;Andrew D. Oxman;Regina Kunz;James Woodcock

  • GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence--indirectness

    Gordon H Guyatt;Andrew D Oxman;Regina Kunz;James Woodcock

  • Consensus on circulatory shock and hemodynamic monitoring. Task force of the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine

    Maurizio Cecconi;Daniel De Backer;Massimo Antonelli;Richard Beale

  • USERS' GUIDES TO THE MEDICAL LITERATURE. II: HOW TO USE AN ARTICLE ABOUT THERAPY OR PREVENTION A. ARE THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY VALID ?

    Gordon H. Guyatt;David L. Sackett;Deborah J. Cook;Gordon Guyatt

  • Grading Quality of Evidence and Strength of Recommendations for Diagnostic Tests and Strategies

    Holger J. Schünemann;Andrew D. Oxman;Jan Brozek;Paul Glasziou

  • Intra-abdominal hypertension and the abdominal compartment syndrome: updated consensus definitions and clinical practice guidelines from the World Society of the Abdominal Compartment Syndrome

    Andrew W Kirkpatrick;Derek J Roberts;Jan De Waele;Roman Jaeschke

  • Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: III. How to Use an Article About a Diagnostic Test A. Are the Results of the Study Valid?

    Roman Jaeschke;Gordon Guyatt;David L. Sackett;Eric Bass

  • Evaluation of impairment of health related quality of life in asthma: development of a questionnaire for use in clinical trials.

    E F Juniper;G H Guyatt;R S Epstein;P J Ferrie

  • Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008 (Intensive Care Medicine (2008) 34, (17-60))

    R. Phillip Dellinger;Mitchell M. Levy;Jean M. Carlet;Julian Bion

Frequent Co-Authors

Gordon H. Guyatt
Gordon H. Guyatt McMaster University
Deborah J. Cook
Deborah J. Cook McMaster University
Holger J. Schünemann
Holger J. Schünemann Humanitas University
Jan Brozek
Jan Brozek McMaster University
Andrew D Oxman
Andrew D Oxman Norwegian Institute of Public Health
Elie A. Akl
Elie A. Akl American University of Beirut
Bram Rochwerg
Bram Rochwerg McMaster University
John W Williams
John W Williams Duke University
Paul Glasziou
Paul Glasziou Bond 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 alternative and complementary healthcare careers can broaden your opportunities aside from a traditional MD path. Online study options have made it easier than ever to start or advance your career in the medical field with greater flexibility and affordability.

For those seeking a quick entry point into nursing, fast track lpn programs offer a pathway to qualify as a Licensed Practical Nurse in a reduced timeframe. If you have a bachelor’s degree and want to specialize in mental health, online msn pmhnp programs train you to become a Psychiatric Mental Health Nurse Practitioner—a career in high demand.

Not all roles in healthcare require a clinical background. Managing healthcare facilities or systems can be just as rewarding. Those concerned about tuition costs can explore the cheapest online healthcare administration degree choices. For experienced professionals, the cheapest mha programs enable you to attain a master’s in healthcare administration online with a manageable investment.

Each pathway offers distinct benefits and can position you for a meaningful, stable career in the U.S. healthcare system.

Best Scientists Citing Roman Jaeschke

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles