World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Stephan von Haehling

Stephan von Haehling

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
105
Citations
47330
World Ranking
6709
National Ranking
386

Stephan von Haehling 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 Stephan von Haehling 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: 504 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.

Stephan von Haehling 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 Stephan von Haehling 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: 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.

Overview

Stephan von Haehling is affiliated with the University of Göttingen in Germany and has a significant body of work in the field of medicine, with a particular focus on cardiology and cardiovascular medicine. Their research spans several subfields including physiology, hematology, molecular biology, and endocrinology, diabetes, and metabolism.

Their scholarly output includes numerous recent papers with diverse topics related to heart failure, nutrition in aging, cardiovascular risks, and iron metabolism. Notable publications feature:

  • Ethical guidelines for publishing in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle, 2021, Journal of Cachexia Sarcopenia and Muscle
  • Ferric carboxymaltose for iron deficiency at discharge after acute heart failure: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial, 2020, The Lancet
  • Baseline cardiovascular risk assessment in cancer patients scheduled to receive cardiotoxic cancer therapies: a position statement and new risk assessment tools from the Cardio-Oncology Study Group of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology in collaboration with the International Cardio-Oncology Society, 2020, European Journal of Heart Failure
  • Role of cardiovascular imaging in cancer patients receiving cardiotoxic therapies: a position statement on behalf of the Heart Failure Association (HFA), the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the Cardio-Oncology Council of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC), 2020, European Journal of Heart Failure
  • The Conceptual Definition of Sarcopenia: Delphi Consensus from the Global Leadership Initiative in Sarcopenia (GLIS), 2024, Age and Ageing

The primary focus of their work concentrates on the management and treatment of heart failure, nutrition and health in aging populations, cardiovascular function and risk factors, erythropoietin and anemia treatment, iron metabolism and disorders, diabetes treatment and management, and frailty in older adults.

Frequent coauthors collaborating with Stephan von Haehling include:

  • Stefan D. Anker
  • Markus S. Anker
  • Andrew J.S. Coats
  • Wolfram Doehner

Their research has been published extensively in specialized journals, with recurring publications in venues such as:

  • Journal of Cachexia Sarcopenia and Muscle
  • European Journal of Heart Failure
  • ESC Heart Failure
  • European Heart Journal
  • Circulation

The scientist's work primarily contributes to understanding complex mechanisms and clinical approaches within cardiovascular medicine and related fields, addressing both disease treatment and ethical standards in publication.

Best Publications

  • Frailty Consensus: A Call to Action

    John E. Morley;Bruno Vellas;G. Abellan van Kan;Stefan D. Anker

  • Sarcopenia With Limited Mobility: An International Consensus

    John E. Morley;Angela Marie Abbatecola;Josep M Argiles;Vickie Baracos

  • Welcome to the ICD-10 code for sarcopenia.

    Stefan D. Anker;John E. Morley;Stephan von Haehling

  • An overview of sarcopenia: facts and numbers on prevalence and clinical impact

    Stephan von Haehling;John E. Morley;Stefan D. Anker

  • Inflammatory mediators in chronic heart failure: an overview

    Stefan D Anker;Stephan von Haehling

  • Altered Intestinal Function in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure

    Anja Sandek;Juergen Bauditz;Alexander Swidsinski;Sabine Buhner

  • Ethical guidelines for publishing in the journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle: update 2017

    Stephan von Haehling;John E. Morley;Andrew J.S. Coats;Stefan D. Anker;Stefan D. Anker

  • Prevalence, incidence, and clinical impact of sarcopenia: facts, numbers, and epidemiology—update 2014

    John E. Morley;Stefan D. Anker;Stephan von Haehling

  • Muscle wasting in patients with chronic heart failure: results from the studies investigating co-morbidities aggravating heart failure (SICA-HF)

    Susann Fülster;Matthias Tacke;Anja Sandek;Nicole Ebner

  • Cachexia as a major underestimated and unmet medical need: facts and numbers

    Stephan von Haehling;Stefan D. Anker

  • Mid-region pro-hormone markers for diagnosis and prognosis in acute dyspnea : results from the BACH (Biomarkers in Acute Heart Failure) trial

    Alan Maisel;Christian Mueller;Richard Nowak;W. Frank Peacock

  • Sarcopenia: A Time for Action. An SCWD Position Paper.

    Juergen Bauer;John E. Morley;Annemie M.W.J. Schols;Luigi Ferrucci

  • Heart failure and kidney dysfunction: epidemiology, mechanisms and management

    Joerg C. Schefold;Gerasimos Filippatos;Gerd Hasenfuss;Stefan D. Anker

  • Prognostic utility of growth differentiation factor-15 in patients with chronic heart failure.

    Tibor Kempf;Stephan von Haehling;Stephan von Haehling;Timo Peter;Tim Allhoff

  • Ferric carboxymaltose for iron deficiency at discharge after acute heart failure: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, controlled trial.

    Piotr Ponikowski;Bridget-Anne Kirwan;Bridget-Anne Kirwan;Stefan D Anker;Theresa McDonagh;Theresa McDonagh

  • Baseline cardiovascular risk assessment in cancer patients scheduled to receive cardiotoxic cancer therapies: a position statement and new risk assessment tools from the Cardio-Oncology Study Group of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology in collaboration with the International Cardio-Oncology Society

    Alexander R. Lyon;Susan Dent;Susannah Stanway;Helena Earl

  • Ethical guidelines for publishing in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle: update 2019

    Stephan von Haehling;John E. Morley;Andrew J. S. Coats;Stefan D. Anker

  • Iron deficiency and heart failure: diagnostic dilemmas and therapeutic perspectives

    Ewa A. Jankowska;Stephan von Haehling;Stefan D. Anker;Iain C. Macdougall

  • Cardiac cachexia: a systematic overview.

    Stephan von Haehling;Mitja Lainscak;Jochen Springer;Stefan D. Anker;Stefan D. Anker

  • Prevalence, incidence and clinical impact of cachexia: facts and numbers-update 2014.

    Stephan von Haehling;Stephan von Haehling;Stefan D. Anker;Stefan D. Anker

Frequent Co-Authors

Wolfram Doehner
Wolfram Doehner Charité - University Medicine Berlin
Andrew J.S. Coats
Andrew J.S. Coats The Heart Research Institute
Maciej Banach
Maciej Banach John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin
Piotr Ponikowski
Piotr Ponikowski Wrocław Medical University
John E. Morley
John E. Morley Saint Louis University
John G.F. Cleland
John G.F. Cleland University of Glasgow
Rudolf A. de Boer
Rudolf A. de Boer University Medical Center Groningen
Gerasimos Filippatos
Gerasimos Filippatos National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
Hans-Dieter Volk
Hans-Dieter Volk Charité - University Medicine Berlin
Petra Reinke
Petra Reinke Berlin-Brandenburger Centrum für Regenerative Therapien

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

As you consider studying medicine in the USA, exploring related online degrees can broaden your career opportunities in healthcare. Many professionals opt for degrees such as a Master’s in Healthcare Administration. For those looking to manage healthcare organizations and improve patient care delivery, affordable online mha programs offer flexible and cost-effective paths to leadership roles.

If you're interested in advancing clinical practice, nursing professionals can explore cheapest dnp programs online to earn a Doctor of Nursing Practice. Pharmacists looking to expand their qualifications can benefit from accredited online pharmacist programs, which enable working professionals to study remotely.

Additionally, with the growth of digital health records, there is strong demand for experts in information management. Earning a health information management bachelor degree online can lead to rewarding roles that blend technology and healthcare. Exploring these online degree options can help you find a pathway that fits your interests and career goals.

Best Scientists Citing Stephan von Haehling

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles