World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Discipline name D-Index World Ranking National Ranking Publications Citations
Medicine 107 6235 3325 311 43609

Thomas A. Stamey publications per year

The chart shows the history of publications by Thomas A. Stamey between 1961 and 2008, highlighting the no. of papers published in each year and offering an overview of the publication velocity of this scholar. Thomas A. Stamey published across 48 years, from 1961 to 2008, averaging 6.5 papers a year. Output peaked at 27 publications in 1995. 4 of the 311 publications appeared in the last two years.

No. of publications
5 10 15 20 25
Bar chart. Horizontal axis: year, 1961 to 2008. Vertical axis: number of publications, 0 to 27. Peak 27 publications in 1995. 1961: 4 publications 1962: 1 publication 1963: 0 publications 1964: 4 publications 1965: 3 publications 1966: 3 publications 1967: 3 publications 1968: 4 publications 1969: 0 publications 1970: 3 publications 1971: 7 publications 1972: 2 publications 1973: 5 publications 1974: 3 publications 1975: 6 publications 1976: 9 publications 1977: 6 publications 1978: 5 publications 1979: 0 publications 1980: 5 publications 1981: 7 publications 1982: 2 publications 1983: 1 publication 1984: 5 publications 1985: 4 publications 1986: 10 publications 1987: 9 publications 1988: 10 publications 1989: 11 publications 1990: 11 publications 1991: 10 publications 1992: 11 publications 1993: 14 publications 1994: 13 publications 1995: 27 publications 1996: 14 publications 1997: 19 publications 1998: 10 publications 1999: 6 publications 2000: 8 publications 2001: 8 publications 2002: 9 publications 2003: 7 publications 2004: 6 publications 2005: 1 publication 2006: 1 publication 2007: 2 publications 2008: 2 publications
1961 2008

311 publications in total across all disciplines

View publications per year as a table
Thomas A. Stamey: publications per year, 1961 to 2008
Year Publications
1961 4
1962 1
1963 0
1964 4
1965 3
1966 3
1967 3
1968 4
1969 0
1970 3
1971 7
1972 2
1973 5
1974 3
1975 6
1976 9
1977 6
1978 5
1979 0
1980 5
1981 7
1982 2
1983 1
1984 5
1985 4
1986 10
1987 9
1988 10
1989 11
1990 11
1991 10
1992 11
1993 14
1994 13
1995 27
1996 14
1997 19
1998 10
1999 6
2000 8
2001 8
2002 9
2003 7
2004 6
2005 1
2006 1
2007 2
2008 2
Total 311
Download as CSV

Thomas A. Stamey publications per year - data summary

  • Thomas A. Stamey, a Medicine scholar from Stanford University, has 311 publications recorded across 48 years, from 1961 to 2008.
  • The oldest publication on record dates to 1961 and the most recent to 2008.
  • The most productive year is 1995, with 27 publications.
  • The least productive years with any output are 1962, 1983, 2005 and 2006, with 1 publication each.
  • 3 of the 48 years in the span carry no publications at all (1963, 1969 and 1979).
  • The rate of publication averages 6.5 papers per year over the whole span, or 6.9 per year counting only the 45 years with at least one publication.
  • The last 5 years on the chart (2004-2008) hold 12 publications, 4% of the career total.
  • Split into equal eras - 1961-1976: 57 publications (3.6 per year); 1977-1992: 107 publications (6.7 per year); 1993-2008: 147 publications (9.2 per year).
  • Comparing the opening and closing eras, the overall trend of publication is rising.

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.

No. of scientists
200 400 600 800
Bar chart with 86 bars. Horizontal axis: publications, 101–120 to 1,796+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 922. Most scientists, 922, have 341–360 publications. The last bar groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more. The highlighted bar, 301–320 publications, is where this scientist sits. 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
101–120 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.

View publications distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by publication count, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
Publications Scientists This scientist
101–120 5
121–140 26
141–160 73
161–180 155
181–200 230
201–220 363
221–240 487
241–260 545
261–280 722
281–300 768
301–320 834 311
321–340 895
341–360 922
361–380 838
381–400 861
401–420 918
421–440 806
441–460 771
461–480 751
481–500 713
501–520 617
521–540 610
541–560 537
561–580 504
581–600 509
601–620 396
621–640 386
641–660 371
661–680 340
681–700 336
701–720 307
721–740 259
741–760 230
761–780 228
781–800 217
801–820 204
821–840 186
841–860 177
861–880 155
881–900 139
901–920 145
921–940 116
941–960 133
961–980 91
981–1,000 96
1,001–1,020 77
1,021–1,040 70
1,041–1,060 63
1,061–1,080 77
1,081–1,100 49
1,101–1,120 54
1,121–1,140 49
1,141–1,160 51
1,161–1,180 35
1,181–1,200 39
1,201–1,220 26
1,221–1,240 37
1,241–1,260 36
1,261–1,280 27
1,281–1,300 32
1,301–1,320 28
1,321–1,340 17
1,341–1,360 30
1,361–1,380 28
1,381–1,400 17
1,401–1,420 21
1,421–1,440 15
1,441–1,460 12
1,461–1,480 12
1,481–1,500 18
1,501–1,520 14
1,521–1,540 17
1,541–1,560 15
1,561–1,580 6
1,581–1,600 2
1,601–1,620 12
1,621–1,640 11
1,641–1,660 8
1,661–1,680 5
1,681–1,700 5
1,701–1,720 10
1,721–1,740 12
1,741–1,760 14
1,761–1,780 6
1,781–1,795 5
1,796+ 100
Download as CSV

Thomas A. Stamey publication distribution in Medicine in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the publication count of all 20,134 Medicine scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 86 ranges running from 101–120 to 1,796+ publications.
  • Thomas A. Stamey, a Medicine scholar from Stanford University, records 311 publications - the 19th percentile of the discipline.
  • 19% of ranked Medicine scientists score the same or lower than Thomas A. Stamey, and about 81% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 441–460 publications range, and Thomas A. Stamey ranks below the median.
  • The most crowded range is 341–360 publications, holding 922 scientists (5% of the field).
  • 64% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 521–540 publications), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 1,796 publications or more, 100 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

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.

No. of scientists
250 500 750 1,000
Bar chart with 75 bars. Horizontal axis: D-Index, 70–71 to 217+. Vertical axis: number of scientists, 0 to 1,027. Most scientists, 1,027, have 82–83 D-Index. The last bar groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more. The highlighted bar, 106–107 D-Index, is where this scientist sits. 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
70–71 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.

View D-Index distribution as a table
Number of Medicine scientists by D-index, Research.com 2026 ranking edition. Based on 20,134 ranked scientists.
D-Index Scientists This scientist
70–71 226
72–73 391
74–75 574
76–77 730
78–79 891
80–81 972
82–83 1,027
84–85 1,003
86–87 960
88–89 970
90–91 922
92–93 839
94–95 808
96–97 779
98–99 668
100–101 611
102–103 630
104–105 513
106–107 541 107
108–109 445
110–111 429
112–113 399
114–115 393
116–117 318
118–119 302
120–121 287
122–123 255
124–125 256
126–127 252
128–129 230
130–131 179
132–133 168
134–135 163
136–137 159
138–139 134
140–141 134
142–143 118
144–145 109
146–147 106
148–149 74
150–151 79
152–153 80
154–155 87
156–157 57
158–159 74
160–161 69
162–163 60
164–165 53
166–167 39
168–169 42
170–171 32
172–173 39
174–175 40
176–177 28
178–179 19
180–181 23
182–183 31
184–185 18
186–187 20
188–189 22
190–191 13
192–193 21
194–195 12
196–197 12
198–199 14
200–201 15
202–203 13
204–205 10
206–207 8
208–209 4
210–211 12
212–213 11
214–215 10
216 4
217+ 98
Download as CSV

Thomas A. Stamey D-index placement in Medicine in 2026 - data summary

  • The chart plots the discipline H-index (D-index) of all 20,134 Medicine scientists ranked by Research.com in 2026, grouped into 75 ranges running from 70–71 to 217+ D-Index.
  • Thomas A. Stamey, a Medicine scholar from Stanford University, records 107 D-Index - the 70th percentile of the discipline.
  • 70% of ranked Medicine scientists score the same or lower than Thomas A. Stamey, and about 30% score higher.
  • The median of the discipline falls in the 94–95 D-Index range, and Thomas A. Stamey ranks above the median.
  • The most crowded range is 82–83 D-Index, holding 1,027 scientists (5% of the field).
  • 70% of the field sits in the lowest quarter of the value range (up to 106–107 D-Index), so the distribution is heavily right-skewed and high scores are rare.
  • The final bar has no upper bound: it groups every scientist with 217 D-Index or more, 98 scientists in all (<1% of the field).

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