Janet K. Baum

5.6k total citations · 1 hit paper
41 papers, 4.2k citations indexed

About

Janet K. Baum is a scholar working on Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, Oncology and Pathology and Forensic Medicine. According to data from OpenAlex, Janet K. Baum has authored 41 papers receiving a total of 4.2k indexed citations (citations by other indexed papers that have themselves been cited), including 16 papers in Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine, 14 papers in Oncology and 12 papers in Pathology and Forensic Medicine. Recurrent topics in Janet K. Baum's work include Global Cancer Incidence and Screening (11 papers), Breast Lesions and Carcinomas (11 papers) and AI in cancer detection (10 papers). Janet K. Baum is often cited by papers focused on Global Cancer Incidence and Screening (11 papers), Breast Lesions and Carcinomas (11 papers) and AI in cancer detection (10 papers). Janet K. Baum collaborates with scholars based in United States, Canada and Israel. Janet K. Baum's co-authors include Etta D. Pisano, Emily F. Conant, Lawrence W. Bassett, Constantine Gatsonis, Martin J. Yaffe, Suddhasatta Acharyya, Roberta A. Jong, Murray Rebner, Laurie L. Fajardo and Edward Hendrick and has published in prestigious journals such as New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA and Radiology.

In The Last Decade

Janet K. Baum

39 papers receiving 3.9k citations

Hit Papers

Diagnostic Performance of Digital versus Film Mammography... 2005 2026 2012 2019 2005 400 800 1.2k
What are hit papers?

Hit papers significantly outperform the citation benchmark for their cohort. A paper qualifies if it has ≥500 total citations, achieves ≥1.5× the top-1% citation threshold for papers in the same subfield and year (this is the minimum needed to enter the top 1%, not the average within it), or reaches the top citation threshold in at least one of its specific research topics.

  1. Diagnostic Performance of Digital versus Film Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening
    2005 1.3k citations Etta D. Pisano, Constantine Gatsonis et al. New England Journal of Medicine profile →

Peers — A (Enhanced Table)

Peers by citation overlap · career bar shows stage (early→late) cites · hero ref

Name h Career Trend Papers Cites
Janet K. Baum United States 26 1.6k 1.6k 1.4k 1.4k 776 41 4.2k
Laurie L. Fajardo United States 32 2.0k 1.3× 2.1k 1.3× 1.9k 1.4× 1.4k 1.0× 976 1.3× 132 5.2k
Marilyn A. Roubidoux United States 35 1.2k 0.8× 1.8k 1.1× 1.4k 1.1× 965 0.7× 372 0.5× 132 3.9k
Murray Rebner United States 22 1.4k 0.8× 978 0.6× 1.2k 0.9× 1.3k 1.0× 246 0.3× 46 3.2k
Carl J. D’Orsi United States 40 2.6k 1.6× 2.8k 1.8× 2.4k 1.8× 2.1k 1.5× 780 1.0× 123 6.3k
Jules H. Sumkin United States 33 1.9k 1.2× 2.0k 1.2× 2.2k 1.6× 916 0.7× 360 0.5× 118 3.8k
Ingvar Andersson Sweden 38 2.0k 1.2× 2.1k 1.4× 2.1k 1.5× 3.3k 2.4× 435 0.6× 130 6.5k
Linn Abraham United States 27 1.1k 0.7× 1.1k 0.7× 1.3k 0.9× 1.8k 1.3× 144 0.2× 57 4.1k
Mary Scott Soo United States 36 570 0.4× 2.4k 1.6× 839 0.6× 668 0.5× 1.1k 1.4× 122 4.8k
R. James Brenner United States 29 763 0.5× 1.1k 0.7× 677 0.5× 1.1k 0.8× 155 0.2× 120 3.7k
Barbara Monsees United States 28 568 0.4× 958 0.6× 602 0.4× 1.2k 0.9× 212 0.3× 76 3.0k

Countries citing papers authored by Janet K. Baum

Since Specialization
Citations

This map shows the geographic impact of Janet K. Baum's research. It shows the number of citations coming from papers published by authors working in each country. You can also color the map by specialization and compare the number of citations received by Janet K. Baum with the expected number of citations based on a country's size and research output (numbers larger than one mean the country cites Janet K. Baum more than expected).

Fields of papers citing papers by Janet K. Baum

Since Specialization
Physical SciencesHealth SciencesLife SciencesSocial Sciences

This network shows the impact of papers produced by Janet K. Baum. Nodes represent research fields, and links connect fields that are likely to share authors. Colored nodes show fields that tend to cite the papers produced by Janet K. Baum. The network helps show where Janet K. Baum may publish in the future.

Co-authorship network of co-authors of Janet K. Baum

This figure shows the co-authorship network connecting the top 25 collaborators of Janet K. Baum. A scholar is included among the top collaborators of Janet K. Baum based on the total number of citations received by their joint publications. Widths of edges represent the number of papers authors have co-authored together. Node borders signify the number of papers an author published with Janet K. Baum. Janet K. Baum is excluded from the visualization to improve readability, since they are connected to all nodes in the network.

All Works

20 of 20 papers shown
1.
Baum, Janet K., Lucy Hanna, Suddhasatta Acharyya, et al.. (2011). Use of BI-RADS 3–Probably Benign Category in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial. Radiology. 260(1). 61–67. 58 indexed citations
2.
Dialani, Vandana, Janet K. Baum, & Tejas S. Mehta. (2010). Sonographic Features of Gynecomastia. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 29(4). 539–547. 19 indexed citations
3.
Pisano, Etta D., R. Edward Hendrick, Martin J. Yaffe, et al.. (2008). Diagnostic Accuracy of Digital versus Film Mammography: Exploratory Analysis of Selected Population Subgroups in DMIST. Radiology. 246(2). 376–383. 324 indexed citations
4.
Pisano, Etta D., Margarita L. Zuley, Janet K. Baum, & Helga S. Marques. (2007). Issues to Consider in Converting to Digital Mammography. Radiologic Clinics of North America. 45(5). 813–830. 19 indexed citations
5.
Pisano, Etta D., Constantine Gatsonis, Edward Hendrick, et al.. (2006). Diagnostic Performance of Digital versus Film Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey. 61(3). 178–178. 408 indexed citations
6.
Lang, Elvira V., Kevin S. Berbaum, Salomão Faintuch, et al.. (2006). Adjunctive self-hypnotic relaxation for outpatient medical procedures: A prospective randomized trial with women undergoing large core breast biopsy. Pain. 126(1). 155–164. 168 indexed citations
7.
Hardy, Seth M., Phyllis J. Kornguth, & Janet K. Baum. (2005). Massachusetts Radiology Resident Attitudes Toward Mammography. Journal of the American College of Radiology. 2(5). 432–435. 6 indexed citations
8.
Pisano, Etta D., Constantine Gatsonis, Edward Hendrick, et al.. (2005). Diagnostic Performance of Digital versus Film Mammography for Breast-Cancer Screening. New England Journal of Medicine. 353(17). 1773–1783. 1331 indexed citations breakdown →
9.
Brem, Rachel F., et al.. (2003). Improvement in Sensitivity of Screening Mammography with Computer-Aided Detection:A Multiinstitutional Trial. American Journal of Roentgenology. 181(3). 687–693. 148 indexed citations
10.
Mehta, Tejas S., Sughra Raza, & Janet K. Baum. (2000). Use of doppler ultrasound in the evaluation of breast carcinoma. Seminars in Ultrasound CT and MRI. 21(4). 297–307. 40 indexed citations
11.
Jacobs, Timothy W., et al.. (1999). Accuracy of Touch Imprint Cytology of Image-Directed Breast Core Needle Biopsies. Acta Cytologica. 43(2). 169–174. 28 indexed citations
12.
Jacobs, Timothy W., Kalliopi P. Siziopikou, Sughra Raza, et al.. (1998). Do prognostic marker studies on core needle biopsy specimens of breast carcinoma accurately reflect the marker status of the tumor?. PubMed. 11(3). 259–64. 57 indexed citations
13.
Raza, Sughra & Janet K. Baum. (1997). Solid breast lesions: evaluation with power Doppler US.. Radiology. 203(1). 164–168. 147 indexed citations
14.
Raza, Sughra, et al.. (1997). Pseudoaneurysm formation in the breast after core needle biopsy.. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 16(12). 849–851. 19 indexed citations
15.
Raptopoulos, Vassilios, et al.. (1996). High Resolution CT Mammography of Surgical Biopsy Specimens. Journal of Computer Assisted Tomography. 20(2). 179–184. 16 indexed citations
16.
Baum, Janet K., et al.. (1990). Optical spectroscopy (INVOS) is unreliable in detecting breast cancer.. American Journal of Roentgenology. 155(1). 43–47.
17.
Baum, Janet K., et al.. (1990). Angiosarcoma of the breast with report of unusual site of first metastasis. Journal of Surgical Oncology. 43(2). 125–130. 14 indexed citations
18.
Fox, Sarah, et al.. (1987). Breast cancer screening recommendations: Current status of womenʼs knowledge. Family & Community Health. 10(3). 39–50. 16 indexed citations
19.
Katz, Paul R., et al.. (1975). Mid‐sagittal dimensions of cervical vertebral bodies. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 43(3). 319–326. 22 indexed citations
20.
Doust, Bruce D., et al.. (1974). Determination of organ volume by means of ultrasonic B‐mode scanning. Journal of Clinical Ultrasound. 2(2). 127–130. 31 indexed citations

Rankless uses publication and citation data sourced from OpenAlex, an open and comprehensive bibliographic database. While OpenAlex provides broad and valuable coverage of the global research landscape, it—like all bibliographic datasets—has inherent limitations. These include incomplete records, variations in author disambiguation, differences in journal indexing, and delays in data updates. As a result, some metrics and network relationships displayed in Rankless may not fully capture the entirety of a scholar's output or impact.

Explore authors with similar magnitude of impact

Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Laurie L. Fajardo Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Marilyn A. Roubidoux Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Murray Rebner Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Carl J. D’Orsi Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Jules H. Sumkin Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Ingvar Andersson Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Linn Abraham Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Mary Scott Soo Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by R. James Brenner Breakdown of academic impact, for papers by Barbara Monsees
Rankless by CCL
2026