World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
91
Citations
29749
World Ranking
11773
National Ranking
6038

Thomas L. Chenevert 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 L. Chenevert 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: 417 publications — 42nd percentile

42% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Thomas L. Chenevert 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 L. Chenevert 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: 91 D-Index — 43rd percentile

43% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Thomas L. Chenevert is affiliated with the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor in the United States. Their research primarily spans the field of medicine, with a strong focus on radiology, nuclear medicine, and imaging. The subfields covered include genetics, molecular biology, epidemiology, and pulmonary and respiratory medicine.

Chenevert's research addresses various advanced topics in medical imaging, including:

  • MRI in cancer diagnosis
  • Radiomics and machine learning in medical imaging
  • Advanced MRI techniques and applications
  • Advanced neuroimaging techniques and applications
  • Medical imaging techniques and applications
  • Myeloproliferative neoplasms: diagnosis and treatment
  • Bone and joint diseases

Frequent co-authors contributing to their body of work include Dariya Malyarenko, Brian D. Ross, Savannah C. Partridge, Lisa J. Wilmes, and Gary D. Luker.

Chenevert has published extensively in several scientific venues, including:

  • Proceedings on CD-ROM - International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine. Scientific Meeting and Exhibition/Proceedings of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, Scientific Meeting and Exhibition (16 publications)
  • Tomography (14 publications)
  • Radiology (4 publications)
  • International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics (4 publications)
  • CNS Neuroscience & Therapeutics (3 publications)

Significant recent papers authored or co-authored by Chenevert include:

  • Moderate-Intensity Exercise and High-Intensity Interval Training Affect Insulin Sensitivity Similarly in Obese Adults, 2020, The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism
  • Predicting breast cancer response to neoadjuvant treatment using multi-feature MRI: results from the I-SPY 2 TRIAL, 2020, npj Breast Cancer
  • Linearity and Bias of Proton Density Fat Fraction as a Quantitative Imaging Biomarker: A Multicenter, Multiplatform, Multivendor Phantom Study, 2021, Radiology
  • Greater Somatosensory Afference With Acupuncture Increases Primary Somatosensory Connectivity and Alleviates Fibromyalgia Pain via Insular γ-Aminobutyric Acid: A Randomized Neuroimaging Trial, 2020, Arthritis & Rheumatology
  • Radiotherapy (RT) Dose-intensification (DI) Using Intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) versus Standard-dose (SD) RT with Temozolomide (TMZ) in Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma (GBM): Preliminary Results of NRG Oncology BN001, 2020, International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

Best Publications

  • Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a Cancer Biomarker: Consensus and Recommendations

    Anwar R. Padhani;Guoying Liu;Dow Mu-Koh;Thomas L. Chenevert

  • Imaging biomarker roadmap for cancer studies.

    James P.B. O'Connor;Eric O. Aboagye;Judith E. Adams;Hugo J.W.L. Aerts;Hugo J.W.L. Aerts

  • Experimental intracerebral hemorrhage : relationship between brain edema, blood flow, and blood-brain barrier permeability in rats

    G. Y. Yang;A. L. Betz;T. L. Chenevert;James A Brunberg

  • Breath-hold gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography of the abdominal aorta and its major branches.

    M R Prince;D L Narasimham;J C Stanley;T L Chenevert

  • Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging: an Early Surrogate Marker of Therapeutic Efficacy in Brain Tumors

    Thomas L. Chenevert;Lauren D. Stegman;Jeremy M.G. Taylor;Patricia L. Robertson

  • Functional diffusion map: A noninvasive MRI biomarker for early stratification of clinical brain tumor response

    Bradford A. Moffat;Thomas L. Chenevert;Theodore S. Lawrence;Charles R. Meyer

  • Diagnosis of Pulmonary Embolism with Magnetic Resonance Angiography

    James F.M. Meaney;John G. Weg;Thomas L. Chenevert;David Stafford-Johnson

  • Combined effect of tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand and ionizing radiation in breast cancer therapy.

    Arul M. Chinnaiyan;Uttara Prasad;Sunita Shankar;Daniel A. Hamstra

  • The effects of time varying intravascular signal intensity and k‐space acquisition order on three‐dimensional MR angiography image quality

    Jeffrey H. Maki;Martin R. Prince;Frank J. Londy;Thomas L. Chenevert

  • Automated detection of bolus arrival and initiation of data acquisition in fast, three-dimensional, gadolinium-enhanced MR angiography.

    Thomas K F Foo;Manojkumar Saranathan;Martin R. Prince;Thomas L. Chenevert

  • Evaluation of the functional diffusion map as an early biomarker of time-to-progression and overall survival in high-grade glioma

    Daniel A. Hamstra;Thomas L. Chenevert;Bradford A. Moffat;Timothy D. Johnson

  • Body diffusion kurtosis imaging: Basic principles, applications, and considerations for clinical practice

    Andrew B. Rosenkrantz;Anwar R. Padhani;Thomas L. Chenevert;Dow Mu Koh

  • Hepatic fat fraction: MR imaging for quantitative measurement and display--early experience.

    Hero K. Hussain;Thomas L. Chenevert;Frank J. Londy;Vikas Gulani

  • Functional diffusion map as an early imaging biomarker for high-grade glioma: correlation with conventional radiologic response and overall survival.

    Daniel A. Hamstra;Craig J. Galbán;Charles R. Meyer;Timothy D. Johnson

  • Contrast-enhanced abdominal MR angiography: Optimization of imaging delay time by automating the detection of contrast material arrival in the aorta

    Martin R. Prince;Thomas L. Chenevert;Thomas K.F. Foo;Frank J. Londy

  • Evaluation of cancer therapy using diffusion magnetic resonance imaging.

    Brian D. Ross;Bradford A. Moffat;Theodore S. Lawrence;Suresh K. Mukherji

  • Quantitative imaging biomarkers alliance (QIBA) recommendations for improved precision of DWI and DCE‐MRI derived biomarkers in multicenter oncology trials

    Amita Shukla-Dave;Nancy A. Obuchowski;Thomas L. Chenevert;Sachin Jambawalikar

  • Pheochromocytoma and Paraganglioma: Comparison of MR Imaging With CT and I-131 MIBG Scintigraphy

    L.E. Quint;G.M. Glazer;I.R. Francis;B. Shapiro

  • Clinical Applications of Diffusion Tensor Imaging

    Qian Dong;Robert C. Welsh;Thomas L. Chenevert;Ruth C. Carlos

  • Gadolinium-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Angiography for Pulmonary Embolism

    Paul D. Stein;Thomas L. Chenevert;Sarah E. Fowler;Lawrence R. Goodman

Frequent Co-Authors

Brian D. Ross
Brian D. Ross University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Alnawaz Rehemtulla
Alnawaz Rehemtulla University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Theodore S. Lawrence
Theodore S. Lawrence University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Larry Junck
Larry Junck University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Paul L. Carson
Paul L. Carson University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Martin R. Prince
Martin R. Prince Cornell University
Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer
Jayashree Kalpathy-Cramer Harvard University
Mark A. Helvie
Mark A. Helvie University of Michigan–Ann Arbor
Paul E. Kinahan
Paul E. Kinahan University of Washington
Jon A. Jacobson
Jon A. Jacobson University of Michigan–Ann Arbor

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

The evolving healthcare field offers a range of online degrees and flexible career pathways for those interested in medicine or related disciplines. For registered nurses aiming to advance quickly, adn to msn bridge programs allow you to pursue a master’s without starting from scratch, accelerating your career growth.

If you are passionate about nutrition and wellness, earning an online degree nutrition can open doors to roles in public health, clinical settings, or research. This pathway supports those wanting to blend healthcare with nutrition expertise.

For future healthcare leaders, cahme-accredited online MHA programs ensure quality training in healthcare administration, preparing graduates for management positions in hospitals, clinics, and other organizations.

For RNs seeking to upgrade their credentials with minimal disruption, fully online rn to bsn programs without clinical requirements make it possible to balance work and study from anywhere.

Each of these online pathways can complement traditional medical studies, offering flexible opportunities for career advancement within the vast healthcare sector.

Best Scientists Citing Thomas L. Chenevert

Trending Scientists

Recently Published Articles