World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
107
Citations
43609
World Ranking
6236
National Ranking
3326

Thomas A. Stamey 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. Stamey 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: 311 publications — 19th percentile

19% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Thomas A. Stamey 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. Stamey 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: 107 D-Index — 70th percentile

70% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Research.com Recognitions

  • 1989 - Member of the National Academy of Medicine (NAM)

Overview

Thomas A. Stamey was affiliated with Stanford University in the United States. Throughout their career, they contributed to the academic community primarily through research and scholarship associated with this institution.

While there is no detailed information on their specific research fields, coauthors, or publication venues, Thomas A. Stamey was recognized for their contributions to medicine. This recognition is reflected in being named a Member of the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) in 1989.

Their career was marked by involvement in the broader medical research community, although detailed data about their specific areas of study, recent papers, subfields, or topics of focus are not provided.

Thomas A. Stamey is deceased, and the information available indicates a record of academic and professional activity centered around their affiliation and acknowledgment by significant medical institutions.

Best Publications

  • Prostate-Specific Antigen as a Serum Marker for Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate

    T.A. Stamey;N. Yang;A.R. Hay;J.E. McNeal

  • Random systematic versus directed ultrasound guided transrectal core biopsies of the prostate

    Kathryn K. Hodge;John E. McNeal;Martha K. Terris;Thomas A. Stamey

  • Zonal distribution of prostatic adenocarcinoma. Correlation with histologic pattern and direction of spread.

    John E. McNeal;Elise A. Redwine;Fuad S. Freiha;Thomas A. Stamey

  • Prostate Specific Antigen in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Adenocarcinoma of the Prostate. II. Radical Prostatectomy Treated Patients

    Thomas A. Stamey;John N. Kabalin;John E. Mcneal;Iain M. Johnstone

  • Localized prostate cancer. Relationship of tumor volume to clinical significance for treatment of prostate cancer.

    Thomas A. Stamey;Fuad S. Freiha;John E. McNeal;Elise A. Redwine

  • Biological determinants of cancer progression in men with prostate cancer.

    Thomas A. Stamey;John E. McNeal;Cheryl M. Yemoto;Bronislava M. Sigal

  • Patterns of progression in prostate cancer.

    JohnE. Mcneal;RobertA. Kindrachuk;FuadS. Freiha;DavidG. Bostwick

  • The prostate specific antigen era in the United States is over for prostate cancer: what happened in the last 20 years?

    Thomas A. Stamey;Mitchell Caldwell;John E. McNEAL;Rosalie Nolley

  • Determination of prostate volume by transrectal ultrasound.

    Martha K. Terris;Thomas A. Stamey

  • Endoscopic suspension of the vesical neck for urinary incontinence.

    Stamey Ta

  • Antiproliferative Effects of 1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D3 on Primary Cultures of Human Prostatic Cells

    Donna M. Peehl;Roman J. Skowronski;Gordon K. Leung;Stephen T. Wong

  • Morphometric and Clinical Studies on 68 Consecutive Radical Prostatectomies

    Thomas A. Stamey;John E. McNeal;Fuad S. Freiha;Elise Redwine

  • MAKING THE MOST OUT OF SIX SYSTEMATIC SEXTANT BIOPSIES

    Thomas A. Stamey

  • Interstitial cystitis: early diagnosis, pathology, and treatment.

    Edward M. Messing;Thomas A. Stamey

  • Ultrasound Guided Transrectal Core Biopsies of the Palpably Abnormal Prostate

    Kathryn K. Hodge;John E. McNeal;Thomas A. Stamey

  • Observations on the doubling time of prostate cancer. The use of serial prostate‐specific antigen in patients with untreated disease as a measure of increasing cancer volume

    Hans-Peter Schmid;John E. McNeal;Thomas A. Stamey

  • Morphologic and clinical significance of multifocal prostate cancers in radical prostatectomy specimens

    Alphaeus M Wise;Thomas A Stamey;John E McNeal;John L Clayton

  • Histologic differentiation, cancer volume, and pelvic lymph node metastasis in adenocarcinoma of the prostate

    John E. McNeal;Arnauld A. Villers;Elise A. Redwine;Fuad S. Freiha

  • Classification of Benign Diseases Associated with Prostatic Pain: Prostatitis or Prostatodynia?

    George W. Drach;William R. Fair;Edwin M. Meares;Thomas A. Stamey

  • The Role of Perineural Space Invasion in the Local Spread of Prostatic Adenocarcinoma

    Arnauld Villers;John E. McNeal;Elise A. Redwine;Fuad S. Freiha

Frequent Co-Authors

John E. McNeal
John E. McNeal Stanford University
Donna M. Peehl
Donna M. Peehl University of California, San Francisco
Martha K. Terris
Martha K. Terris Augusta University
Arnauld Villers
Arnauld Villers University of Lille
Iain M. Johnstone
Iain M. Johnstone Stanford University
Alan W. Partin
Alan W. Partin Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Daniel W. Chan
Daniel W. Chan Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine
Georg Bartsch
Georg Bartsch University of Innsbruck
Samir S. Taneja
Samir S. Taneja New York University
Herbert Lepor
Herbert Lepor New York 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 medical careers in the USA reveals a variety of alternative and supplementary pathways, especially if you're seeking flexibility or faster entry into the healthcare field. For those wanting a practical, hands-on role, fast track lpn programs provide an efficient route to licensure as a Licensed Practical Nurse, making them ideal for students eager to start working soon.

Mental health is a growing area of need, and online pmhnp programs enable registered nurses to specialize in psychiatric care, often in less time than traditional schooling. This pathway supports those interested in supporting community mental well-being.

Prefer to work in healthcare settings without providing direct patient care? online healthcare administration programs can prepare you for vital leadership and operational roles, from small clinics to large hospitals.

Finally, if you're concerned about affordability, look into the masters in healthcare administration cost to find programs that balance value with quality education. These online options make advancing your career in healthcare more accessible than ever before.

Best Scientists Citing Thomas A. Stamey

Recently Published Articles