World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
82
Citations
23640
World Ranking
16165
National Ranking
8134

Samir S. Taneja 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 Samir S. Taneja 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: 611 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: 927 publications — 92nd percentile

92% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Samir S. Taneja 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 Samir S. Taneja 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: 400 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: 82 D-Index — 21st percentile

21% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more.

Overview

Samir S. Taneja is affiliated with New York University in the United States and focuses primarily on research in the field of medicine. Their work is especially concentrated around pulmonary and respiratory medicine, surgery, cancer research, radiology, nuclear medicine and imaging, and rheumatology.

Taneja's main research topics include prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment, prostate cancer treatment and research, bladder and urothelial cancer treatments, urologic and reproductive health conditions, cancer, lipids, and metabolism, renal cell carcinoma treatment, and spectroscopy techniques in biomedical and chemical research.

Frequent coauthors collaborating with Taneja include William C. Huang, James Wysock, Herbert Lepor, Fang-Ming Deng, and Miles P. Mannas.

The most common publication venues for Taneja's work include:

  • The Journal of Urology
  • Urologic Oncology Seminars and Original Investigations
  • International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
  • Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • Radiotherapy and Oncology

Recent papers authored or co-authored by Taneja include:

  • Variability of the Positive Predictive Value of PI-RADS for Prostate MRI across 26 Centers: Experience of the Society of Abdominal Radiology Prostate Cancer Disease-focused Panel, 2020, Radiology
  • Optimization of prostate biopsy - Micro-Ultrasound versus MRI (OPTIMUM): A 3-arm randomized controlled trial evaluating the role of 29 MHz micro-ultrasound in guiding prostate biopsy in men with clinical suspicion of prostate cancer, 2021, Contemporary Clinical Trials
  • Pembrolizumab (pembro) in combination with gemcitabine (Gem) and concurrent hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) as bladder sparing treatment for muscle-invasive urothelial cancer of the bladder (MIBC): A multicenter phase 2 trial, 2021, Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • Development and Validation of an 18-Gene Urine Test for High-Grade Prostate Cancer, 2024, JAMA Oncology
  • Primary Whole-gland Ablation for the Treatment of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: A Focal Therapy Society Best Practice Statement, 2023, European Urology

Best Publications

  • MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis

    Veeru Kasivisvanathan;Antti S. Rannikko;Marcelo Borghi;Valeria Panebianco

  • Can Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer Be Detected with Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging? A Systematic Review of the Literature

    Jurgen J. Fütterer;Alberto Briganti;Pieter De Visschere;Mark Emberton

  • Image-guided prostate biopsy using magnetic resonance imaging-derived targets: a systematic review.

    Caroline M. Moore;Caroline M. Moore;Nicola L. Robertson;Nasr Arsanious;Thomas Middleton

  • Standards of Reporting for MRI-targeted Biopsy Studies (START) of the Prostate: Recommendations from an International Working Group.

    Caroline M. Moore;Veeru Kasivisvanathan;Scott Eggener;Mark Emberton

  • Complications After Systematic, Random, and Image-guided Prostate Biopsy

    Marco Borghesi;Hashim Ahmed;Robert Nam;Edward Schaeffer

  • Re: A Prospective, Blinded Comparison of Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging-Ultrasound Fusion and Visual Estimation in the Performance of MR-Targeted Prostate Biopsy: The PROFUS Trial

    James S. Wysock;Andrew B. Rosenkrantz;William C. Huang;Michael D. Stifelman

  • Prostate Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Targeted Biopsy in Patients with a Prior Negative Biopsy: A Consensus Statement by AUA and SAR

    Andrew B. Rosenkrantz;Sadhna Verma;Peter Choyke;Steven C. Eberhardt

  • Can Urinary PCA3 Supplement PSA in the Early Detection of Prostate Cancer

    John T. Wei;Ziding Feng;Alan W. Partin;Elissa Brown

  • Prostate cancer localization using multiparametric MR imaging: comparison of Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System (PI-RADS) and Likert scales.

    Andrew B. Rosenkrantz;Sooah Kim;Ruth P. Lim;Nicole Hindman

  • Prostate Cancer: Feasibility and Preliminary Experience of a Diffusional Kurtosis Model for Detection and Assessment of Aggressiveness of Peripheral Zone Cancer

    Andrew B. Rosenkrantz;Eric E. Sigmund;Glyn Johnson;James S. Babb

  • Multiparametric MRI for prostate cancer diagnosis: current status and future directions

    Armando Stabile;Armando Stabile;Armando Stabile;Francesco Giganti;Francesco Giganti;Andrew B. Rosenkrantz;Samir S. Taneja

  • Variability of the positive predictive value of PI-RADS for prostate MRI across 26 centers: Experience of the society of abdominal radiology prostate cancer disease-focused panel

    Antonio C. Westphalen;Charles E. McCulloch;Jordan M. Anaokar;Sandeep Arora

  • Changes in Renal Function Following Nephroureterectomy May Affect the Use of Perioperative Chemotherapy

    Matthew G. Kaag;Rebecca L. O'Malley;Padraic O'Malley;Guilherme Godoy

  • Optimization of Initial Prostate Biopsy in Clinical Practice: Sampling, Labeling, and Specimen Processing

    Marc A. Bjurlin;H. Ballentine Carter;Paul Schellhammer;Michael S. Cookson

  • Radiologist, be aware: ten pitfalls that confound the interpretation of multiparametric prostate MRI.

    Andrew B. Rosenkrantz;Samir S. Taneja

  • Comparison of interreader reproducibility of the prostate imaging reporting and data system and likert scales for evaluation of multiparametric prostate MRI.

    Andrew B. Rosenkrantz;Ruth P. Lim;Mershad Haghighi;Molly B. Somberg

  • Update of the Standard Operating Procedure on the Use of Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging for the Diagnosis, Staging and Management of Prostate Cancer.

    Marc A. Bjurlin;Peter R. Carroll;Scott Eggener;Pat F. Fulgham

  • Image Guided Focal Therapy for Magnetic Resonance Imaging Visible Prostate Cancer: Defining a 3-Dimensional Treatment Margin Based on Magnetic Resonance Imaging Histology Co-Registration Analysis

    Julien Le Nobin;Andrew B. Rosenkrantz;Arnauld Villers;Clément Orczyk

  • Relationship Between Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Biopsy Indication, and MRI-ultrasound Fusion–targeted Prostate Biopsy Outcomes

    Xiaosong Meng;Andrew B. Rosenkrantz;Neil Mendhiratta;Michael Fenstermaker

  • Re: Abiraterone in Metastatic Prostate Cancer without Previous Chemotherapy

    Samir S. Taneja

Frequent Co-Authors

Herbert Lepor
Herbert Lepor New York University
Jonathan Melamed
Jonathan Melamed New York University
James S. Babb
James S. Babb New York University
Mark Emberton
Mark Emberton University College London
Michael J. Garabedian
Michael J. Garabedian New York University
Laurence Klotz
Laurence Klotz University of Toronto
Alan W. Partin
Alan W. Partin Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Scott E. Eggener
Scott E. Eggener University of Chicago
Henry Rusinek
Henry Rusinek New York University
Ming-Ming Zhou
Ming-Ming Zhou Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

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

While studying Medicine in the USA is a popular career aspiration, there are several alternative and complementary online degree pathways worth exploring. Many students may find programs aligned with healthcare, administration, or nursing provide excellent flexibility and future opportunities.

For those interested in nutrition and health, an online degree in nutrition can open doors to fields like dietetics, public health, and wellness coaching. Alternatively, aspiring healthcare managers can pursue top cahme-accredited mha programs to prepare for leadership roles in hospitals, clinics, and health systems.

Registered Nurses looking to advance quickly without on-site requirements might choose rn to bsn no clinical hours programs, providing flexibility for working professionals. For those already holding advanced nursing credentials, online dnp programs offer a pathway to the highest level of nursing practice.

Each of these options expands career choices in the broader healthcare sector, offering flexible, accredited online study tailored to your professional ambitions.

Best Scientists Citing Samir S. Taneja

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles