World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Thomas A. D'Amico

Thomas A. D'Amico

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
86
Citations
37369
World Ranking
13906
National Ranking
7060

Thomas A. D'Amico 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 Thomas A. D'Amico 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: 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 publications 1,796+

This scientist: 513 publications — 60th percentile

60% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Thomas A. D'Amico 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 Thomas A. D'Amico 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: 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 D-Index 217+

This scientist: 86 D-Index — 31st percentile

31% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Thomas A. D'Amico is affiliated with Duke University in the United States and has an extensive research portfolio in the field of Medicine with particular emphasis on pulmonary and respiratory medicine, surgery, and oncology. Their work encompasses a variety of clinical and research topics related to lung, esophageal, and gastric cancers.

Their main fields of study include:

  • Medicine

Within this overarching field, their subfields of study focus on:

  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Surgery
  • Oncology
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

The primary topics of Thomas A. D'Amico's research contributions include:

  • Lung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Esophageal Cancer Research and Treatment
  • Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes
  • Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
  • Esophageal and GI Pathology
  • Radiomics and Machine Learning in Medical Imaging
  • Lung Cancer Research Studies

The scientist has published extensively in several distinguished academic venues. The frequent publication venues include:

  • The Annals of Thoracic Surgery
  • Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
  • Seminars in Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
  • Annals of Surgery
  • Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network

Among recent papers authored or coauthored by Thomas A. D'Amico are:

  • "Gastric Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology," published in 2022 in the Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
  • "Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology," published in 2022 in the Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
  • "NCCN Guidelines Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 2.2021," published in 2021 in the Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
  • "Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers, Version 2.2023, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology," published in 2023 in the Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network
  • "Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 2.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology," published in 2021 in the Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network

Frequent coauthors who have collaborated extensively with Thomas A. D'Amico include:

  • Betty C. Tong
  • Vignesh Raman
  • Robert M. Sade
  • David H. Harpole
  • John W. Entwistle

Best Publications

  • Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer

    David S. Ettinger;Wallace Akerley;Gerold Bepler;Andrew Chang

  • Non-small cell lung cancer, version 5.2017: Clinical practice guidelines in oncology

    David S. Ettinger;Douglas E. Wood;Dara L. Aisner;Wallace Akerley

  • Gastric Cancer, Version 3.2016; Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

    Jaffer A. Ajani;Thomas A. D'Amico;Khaldoun Almhanna;David J. Bentrem

  • Thoracoscopic lobectomy is associated with lower morbidity than open lobectomy: A propensity-matched analysis from the STS database

    Subroto Paul;Nasser K. Altorki;Shubin Sheng;Paul C. Lee

  • Esophageal and Esophagogastric Junction Cancers, Version 2.2019, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

    Jaffer A. Ajani;Thomas A. D'Amico;David J. Bentrem;Joseph Chao

  • Non-small cell lung cancer, version 1.2020: Featured updates to the NCCN guidelines

    David S. Ettinger;Douglas E. Wood;Charu Aggarwal;Dara L. Aisner

  • NCCN Guidelines Insights: Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 2.2021

    David S. Ettinger;David S. Ettinger;Douglas E. Wood;Douglas E. Wood;Dara L. Aisner;Wallace Akerley;Wallace Akerley

  • Video-Assisted Thoracic Surgery Lobectomy: Report of CALGB 39802—A Prospective, Multi-Institution Feasibility Study

    Scott J. Swanson;James E. Herndon;Thomas A. D'Amico;Todd L. Demmy

  • Gastric Cancer, Version 2.2013

    Jaffer A. Ajani;David J. Bentrem;Stephen Besh;Thomas A. D'Amico

  • Reducing hospital morbidity and mortality following esophagectomy

    B.Zane Atkins;Ashish S. Shah;Kelley A. Hutcheson;Jennifer H. Mangum

  • Non-small cell lung cancer: Clinical practice guidelines in oncology

    David S. Ettinger;Wallace Akerley;Gerold Bepler;Matthew G. Blum

  • Thoracoscopic Lobectomy Is a Safe and Versatile Procedure: Experience With 500 Consecutive Patients

    Mark W. Onaitis;Rebecca P. Petersen;Stafford S. Balderson;Eric Toloza

  • Non-small cell lung cancer, version 2.2013: Featured updates to the NCCN guidelines

    David S. Ettinger;Wallace Akerley;Hossein Borghaei;Andrew C. Chang

  • Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 6.2015

    David S. Ettinger;Douglas E. Wood;Wallace Akerley;Lyudmila A. Bazhenova

  • NCCN Guidelines ® Insights: Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 4.2016 Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines

    David S. Ettinger;Douglas E. Wood;Wallace Akerley;Lyudmila A. Bazhenova

  • NCCN Guidelines Insights: Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer, Version 5.2018

    David S. Ettinger;Dara L. Aisner;Douglas E. Wood;Wallace Akerley

  • Thoracoscopic lobectomy is associated with lower morbidity compared with thoracotomy.

    Nestor R. Villamizar;Marcus D. Darrabie;William R. Burfeind;Rebecca P. Petersen

  • Esophageal and esophagogastric junction cancers, version 1.2015.

    Jaffer A. Ajani;Thomas A. D'Amico;Khaldoun Almhanna;David J. Bentrem

  • Thoracoscopic Lobectomy Facilitates the Delivery of Chemotherapy after Resection for Lung Cancer

    Rebecca P. Petersen;Duy Khanh Pham;William R. Burfeind;Steven I. Hanish

  • Malignant pleural mesothelioma.

    David S. Ettinger;Wallace Akerley;Hossein Borghaei;Andrew Chang

Frequent Co-Authors

David H. Harpole
David H. Harpole Duke University
Gregory A. Otterson
Gregory A. Otterson The Ohio State University
Mark B. Orringer
Mark B. Orringer University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
David S. Ettinger
David S. Ettinger Johns Hopkins University
Lawrence B. Marks
Lawrence B. Marks University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Lucian R. Chirieac
Lucian R. Chirieac Brigham and Women's Hospital
Gregory J. Riely
Gregory J. Riely Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Christopher G. Willett
Christopher G. Willett Duke University
Ramaswamy Govindan
Ramaswamy Govindan Washington University in St. Louis
John E. Mayer
John E. Mayer Boston Children's Hospital

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 online degrees and career pathways can provide valuable options for those interested in the medical field without taking the traditional route of studying Medicine in the USA. Many students are drawn to roles like medical billing or coding, where accredited programs with flexible learning and funding opportunities are essential. For those seeking such options, attending accredited medical billing and coding schools with financial aid can make career changes more accessible and affordable.

Some learners prefer clinical roles but may wish to avoid standardized testing requirements. For these individuals, enrolling in a nursing school that don't require teas can help streamline the application process and reduce barriers to entry.

Those interested in leadership or administration might consider completing a best online healthcare administration degree, which equips graduates with essential management skills for the evolving healthcare landscape. Nurses aiming for advanced practice may be interested in bridge programs such as asn to fnp, creating clear pathways to become family nurse practitioners efficiently. These alternatives support diverse goals and make entering the medical field more achievable.

Best Scientists Citing Thomas A. D'Amico

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles