World's Best Scientists 2026 revealed!
Thomas M. van Gulik

Thomas M. van Gulik

D-Index & Metrics

Medicine

D-Index
103
Citations
36304
World Ranking
7406
National Ranking
281

Thomas M. van Gulik 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 M. van Gulik 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: 702 publications — 81st percentile

81% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Thomas M. van Gulik 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 M. van Gulik 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: 103 D-Index — 65th percentile

65% of scientists in this discipline score the same or lower.

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

Overview

Thomas M. van Gulik is affiliated with the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands. Their primary field of study is Medicine, with a focus on several subfields including Surgery, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, Oncology, Hepatology, and Epidemiology.

Their research covers a range of topics centered around hepatobiliary and oncological studies, notably:

  • Cholangiocarcinoma and Gallbladder Cancer Studies
  • Gallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
  • Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treatment and Prognosis
  • Organ Transplantation Techniques and Outcomes
  • Pediatric Hepatobiliary Diseases and Treatments
  • Liver Disease and Transplantation

Thomas M. van Gulik has published extensively in various journals. Frequent publication venues include:

  • HPB
  • HepatoBiliary Surgery and Nutrition
  • Annals of Surgical Oncology
  • European Journal of Surgical Oncology
  • BJS Open

Some of the recent papers from the scholar include:

  • "Portal Vein Embolization is Associated with Reduced Liver Failure and Mortality in High-Risk Resections for Perihilar Cholangiocarcinoma" (2020), published in Annals of Surgical Oncology
  • "Partial freezing of rat livers extends preservation time by 5-fold" (2022), published in Nature Communications
  • "An International Expert Delphi Consensus on Defining Textbook Outcome in Liver Surgery (TOLS)" (2022), published in Annals of Surgery
  • "Mathematical modeling of the thermal effects of irreversible electroporation for in vitro, in vivo, and clinical use: a systematic review" (2020), published in International Journal of Hyperthermia
  • "Efficacy and safety of FOLFIRINOX as salvage treatment in advanced biliary tract cancer: an open-label, single arm, phase 2 trial" (2020), published in British Journal of Cancer

The frequent coauthors collaborating with Thomas M. van Gulik are:

  • Joris I. Erdmann
  • Marc G. Besselink
  • Pim B. Olthof
  • Geert Kazemier
  • Rutger-Jan Swijnenburg

Best Publications

  • Preoperative Biliary Drainage for Cancer of the Head of the Pancreas

    Niels A van der Gaag;Erik A J Rauws;Casper H J van Eijck;Marco J Bruno

  • Rates of complications and death after pancreaticoduodenectomy: risk factors and the impact of hospital volume.

    Dirk J. Gouma;Rutger C. I. van Geenen;Thomas M. van Gulik;Rob J. de Haan

  • The Southampton Consensus Guidelines for Laparoscopic Liver Surgery: From Indication to Implementation.

    Mohammad Abu Hilal;Luca Aldrighetti;Ibrahim Dagher;Bjorn Edwin

  • Laparoscopic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic or periampullary tumours (LEOPARD-2) : a multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised controlled phase 2/3 trial

    Jony van Hilst;Thijs de Rooij;Koop Bosscha;David J Brinkman

  • Hospital volume and mortality after pancreatic resection: a systematic review and an evaluation of intervention in the Netherlands.

    N Tjarda van Heek;Koert F. D. Kuhlmann;Rob J. Scholten;Steve M. M. de Castro

  • Assessment of hepatic steatosis in patients undergoing liver resection: comparison of US, CT, T1-weighted dual-echo MR imaging, and point-resolved 1H MR spectroscopy.

    Jochem R van Werven;Hendrik A Marsman;Aart J Nederveen;Nico J Smits

  • Steatosis as a risk factor in liver surgery.

    Reeta Veteläinen;Arlène van Vliet;Dirk J. Gouma;Thomas M. van Gulik

  • Physiological and biochemical basis of clinical liver function tests: a review

    Lisette T Hoekstra;Wilmar de Graaf;Geert A A Nibourg;Michal Heger

  • Assessment of Future Remnant Liver Function Using Hepatobiliary Scintigraphy in Patients Undergoing Major Liver Resection

    Wilmar de Graaf;Krijn P. van Lienden;Sander Dinant;Joris J. T. H. Roelofs

  • Transporters involved in the hepatic uptake of (99m)Tc-mebrofenin and indocyanine green

    Wilmar de Graaf;Stephanie Häusler;Michal Heger;Tessa M. van Ginhoven

  • Benign biliary strictures. Surgery or endoscopy

    P. H. P. Davids;A. K. F. Tanka;E. A. J. Rauws;T. M. Van Gulik

  • Clinical Application of Bioartificial Liver Support Systems

    Maarten Paul van de Kerkhove;Ruurdtje Hoekstra;Robert A. F. M. Chamuleau;Thomas M. van Gulik

  • Delayed gastric emptying after standard pancreaticoduodenectomy versus pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy: an analysis of 200 consecutive patients

    Mark I.van Berge Henegouwen;Thomas M.van Gulik;Laurens Th DeWit;Jan H Allema

  • Delayed massive hemorrhage after pancreatic and biliary surgery: embolization or surgery?

    Steve M. M. De Castro;Koert F. D. Kuhlmann;Olivier R. C. Busch;Otto M. Van Delden

  • Evaluation of morbidity and mortality after resection for hilar cholangiocarcinoma—a single center experience☆

    Michael F. Gerhards;Thomas M. van Gulik;Laurens Th. de Wit;Hugo Obertop

  • Referral Pattern and Timing of Repair Are Risk Factors for Complications After Reconstructive Surgery for Bile Duct Injury

    Philip R. de Reuver;Irene Grossmann;Olivier R. Busch;Huug Obertop

  • Factor VIII expression in liver disease.

    Martine J. Hollestelle;Hendrika G. M. Geertzen;Irene H. Straatsburg;Thomas M. van Gulik

  • Improved Outcome of Resection of Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma (Klatskin Tumor)

    Sander Dinant;Michael F. Gerhards;E. A. J. Rauws;Olivier R. C. Busch

  • Mechanistic overview of reactive species-induced degradation of the endothelial glycocalyx during hepatic ischemia/reperfusion injury

    Rowan F. van Golen;Thomas M. van Gulik;Michal Heger;Michal Heger

  • Tumor cell survival pathways activated by photodynamic therapy: a molecular basis for pharmacological inhibition strategies

    Mans Broekgaarden;Ruud Weijer;Thomas M. van Gulik;Michael R. Hamblin;Michael R. Hamblin

Frequent Co-Authors

Olivier R. Busch
Olivier R. Busch University of Amsterdam
Dirk J. Gouma
Dirk J. Gouma University of Amsterdam
Marc G. Besselink
Marc G. Besselink University of Amsterdam
Ulrich Beuers
Ulrich Beuers University of Amsterdam
Jan N. M. IJzermans
Jan N. M. IJzermans Erasmus University Rotterdam
Fiebo J.W. ten Kate
Fiebo J.W. ten Kate Utrecht University
Can Ince
Can Ince Erasmus University Rotterdam
William R. Jarnagin
William R. Jarnagin Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Marco J. Bruno
Marco J. Bruno Erasmus University Rotterdam
Mehmet Toner
Mehmet Toner Harvard 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

If you’re considering studying Medicine in the USA, online degrees provide flexible alternatives or complementary pathways in healthcare. Many students begin their journey with nursing, and programs such as an lpn school without teas test requirement allow entry without standardized exam barriers, making healthcare careers more accessible.

For those interested in healthcare leadership, healthcare administration degrees offer fast-track online options that prepare students to manage clinics, hospitals, and public health organizations. Nurses looking to advance their practice should explore adn to np bridge programs, which enable registered nurses with associate degrees to become nurse practitioners through flexible online learning.

Nutrition is another vital field in modern medicine. Earning one of the best online nutrition degree options can open careers in dietetics, health education, and wellness coaching.

These related online degrees can broaden your expertise, unlock specialized roles, or serve as stepping stones toward a medical degree in the US.

Best Scientists Citing Thomas M. van Gulik

Trending Scientists