World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
88
Citations
44337
World Ranking
12924
National Ranking
6605

Shaker R. Dakhil 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 Shaker R. Dakhil 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: 412 publications — 41st percentile

41% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Shaker R. Dakhil 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 Shaker R. Dakhil 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: 88 D-Index — 36th percentile

36% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Shaker R. Dakhil is affiliated with the University of Kansas in the United States and has a research focus in the fields of Medicine and Biochemistry, Genetics, and Molecular Biology. Their work is particularly concentrated in oncology and pulmonary medicine.

Their primary subfields of study include:

  • Oncology
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cancer Research
  • Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
  • Genetics

The main topics covered in their research span:

  • Advanced Breast Cancer Therapies
  • Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Breast Cancer Treatment Studies
  • Monoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
  • Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
  • Estrogen and related hormone effects

Notable recent papers authored or co-authored by Shaker R. Dakhil include:

  • Pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (CLEOPATRA): end-of-study results from a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, 2020, The Lancet Oncology
  • Durvalumab, with or without tremelimumab, plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide alone in first-line treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CASPIAN): updated results from a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial, 2020, The Lancet Oncology
  • Nivolumab and Ipilimumab as Maintenance Therapy in Extensive-Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer: CheckMate 451, 2021, Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab With Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone for Metastatic NSCLC in CheckMate 9LA: 3-Year Clinical Update and Outcomes in Patients With Brain Metastases or Select Somatic Mutations, 2022, Journal of Thoracic Oncology
  • Fatigue, anxiety, and quality of life in breast cancer patients compared to non-cancer controls: a nationwide longitudinal analysis, 2021, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Frequently publishing in key scientific journals, this researcher has contributed extensively to:

  • Journal of Clinical Oncology
  • Cancer Research
  • The Oncologist
  • The Lancet Oncology
  • Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Collaboration is a significant aspect of their work, with frequent co-authors including:

  • Charles L. Wiseman
  • Jarrod P. Holmes
  • Sandra M. Swain
  • Adam Brufsky
  • Louis Fehrenbacher

Best Publications

  • Trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable HER2-positive breast cancer

    Edward H. Romond;Edith A. Perez;John Bryant;Vera J. Suman

  • Preoperative Chemotherapy: Updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocols B-18 and B-27

    Priya Rastogi;Stewart J. Anderson;Harry D. Bear;Charles E. Geyer

  • Durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide versus platinum–etoposide in first-line treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CASPIAN): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial

    Luis Paz-Ares;Mikhail Dvorkin;Yuanbin Chen;Niels Reinmuth

  • Rituximab-CHOP Versus CHOP Alone or With Maintenance Rituximab in Older Patients With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

    Thomas M. Habermann;Edie A. Weller;Vicki A. Morrison;Randy D. Gascoyne

  • Ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel for second-line treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on platinum-based therapy (REVEL): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial

    Edward B. Garon;Tudor Eliade Ciuleanu;Oscar Arrieta;Kumar Prabhash

  • Venlafaxine in management of hot flashes in survivors of breast cancer: a randomised controlled trial

    Charles L Loprinzi;John W Kugler;Jeff A Sloan;James A Mailliard

  • Phase II Trial of Temsirolimus (CCI-779) in Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme: A North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study

    Evanthia Galanis;Jan C. Buckner;Matthew J. Maurer;Jeffrey I. Kreisberg

  • Cabozantinib Versus Sunitinib As Initial Targeted Therapy for Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma of Poor or Intermediate Risk: The Alliance A031203 CABOSUN Trial

    Toni K. Choueiri;Susan Halabi;Ben L. Sanford;Olwen Hahn

  • Cardiac Safety Analysis of Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide Followed by Paclitaxel With or Without Trastuzumab in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 Adjuvant Breast Cancer Trial

    Edith A. Perez;Vera J. Suman;Nancy E. Davidson;George W. Sledge

  • Pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (CLEOPATRA): end-of-study results from a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study

    Sandra M Swain;Sandra M Swain;David Miles;Sung-Bae Kim;Young-Hyuck Im

  • Oxaliplatin, Fluorouracil, and Leucovorin for Patients With Unresectable Liver-Only Metastases From Colorectal Cancer: A North Central Cancer Treatment Group Phase II Study

    Steven R. Alberts;William L. Horvath;William C. Sternfeld;Richard M. Goldberg

  • Standard Chemotherapy Compared With High-Dose Chemoradiotherapy for Multiple Myeloma: Final Results of Phase III US Intergroup Trial S9321

    Bart Barlogie;Robert A. Kyle;Kenneth C. Anderson;Philip R. Greipp

  • Goserelin for ovarian protection during breast-cancer adjuvant chemotherapy.

    Halle C F Moore;Joseph M. Unger;Kelly Anne Phillips;Frances Boyle;Frances Boyle

  • Phase II Trial of Single-Agent Temsirolimus (CCI-779) for Relapsed Mantle Cell Lymphoma

    Thomas E. Witzig;Susan M. Geyer;Irene Ghobrial;David J. Inwards

  • Cetuximab and First-Line Taxane/Carboplatin Chemotherapy in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results of the Randomized Multicenter Phase III Trial BMS099

    Thomas J. Lynch;Taral Patel;Luke Dreisbach;Michael McCleod

  • Phase III trial of irinotecan/cisplatin compared with etoposide/cisplatin in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: clinical and pharmacogenomic results from SWOG S0124

    Primo N. Lara;Ronald Natale;John Crowley;Heinz Josef Lenz

  • Phase III Study of Immediate Compared With Delayed Docetaxel After Front-Line Therapy With Gemcitabine Plus Carboplatin in Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

    Panos M. Fidias;Shaker R. Dakhil;Alan P. Lyss;David M. Loesch

  • Dronabinol Versus Megestrol Acetate Versus Combination Therapy for Cancer-Associated Anorexia: A North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study

    Aminah Jatoi;Harold E. Windschitl;Charles L. Loprinzi;Jeff A. Sloan

  • Ramucirumab plus erlotinib in patients with untreated, EGFR-mutated, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (RELAY): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

    Kazuhiko Nakagawa;Edward B Garon;Takashi Seto;Makoto Nishio

  • Ipatasertib plus paclitaxel versus placebo plus paclitaxel as first-line therapy for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (LOTUS): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

    Sung-Bae Kim;Rebecca Dent;Seock-Ah Im;Marc Espié

Frequent Co-Authors

Jeff A. Sloan
Jeff A. Sloan Mayo Clinic
Paul J. Novotny
Paul J. Novotny Mayo Clinic
Gary R. Morrow
Gary R. Morrow University of Rochester Medical Center
Gabriel N. Hortobagyi
Gabriel N. Hortobagyi The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center
William E. Barlow
William E. Barlow Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
Nicholas J. Vogelzang
Nicholas J. Vogelzang University of Nevada Reno
Julie R. Gralow
Julie R. Gralow American Society of Clinical Oncology
Kathy S. Albain
Kathy S. Albain Loyola University Chicago

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

Embarking on a career in medicine doesn't always require the traditional path through medical school. Many students explore alternative healthcare careers for a faster and more flexible entry into the workforce. For example, financial aid for medical billing and coding can help cover the cost of training, making this in-demand profession accessible to more people.

Nursing remains one of the most popular and impactful career options. Opportunities now exist to enroll in a nursing school that does not require teas test, removing a major barrier for many prospective students.

For those interested in management roles, an healthcare administration accelerated degree offers a streamlined track to leadership positions within hospitals, clinics, or health organizations.

Registered nurses looking to advance their careers can consider adn to fnp programs, which bridge their credentials towards becoming a Family Nurse Practitioner in less time, often through online study.

These alternative pathways allow students greater flexibility, specialized focus, and the ability to enter the healthcare field more quickly, all while taking advantage of online learning options and financial support.

Best Scientists Citing Shaker R. Dakhil

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles