ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2016
[A critical perspective on the global research activity in the field of bladder cancer].
Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- New quality and quantity indices in science (NewQIS): results of the first decade-project progress review.Scientometrics · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBladder cancer (BC) is one of the most common forms of cancer world-wide. This underestimated disease can cause severe morbidity and mortality in individuals. Increasing awareness can be depicted by the increasing numbers of publications since the 1990s. Hence, it is challenging for a scientist to obtain an overview of the topic. To quantify the global research activity in this field, a scientometric investigation was conducted. MATERIAL AND
methodsUsing the database Web of Science, the bibliometric data of publications on the topic of BC was acquired for the period 1900-2007. According to the NewQIS protocol, different visualization techniques and scientometric methods were applied.
resultsA total of 19,651 publications were evaluated. The USA takes a leading position in terms of the overall number of publications, institutions, and collaborations. International collaboration on BC has changed considerably in terms of quantity during the past 20 years. The largest number of articles and the highest number of citations regarding BC are found in the Journal of Urology. Thus, it is considered the most prolific journal. Furthermore, the productivity (i. e., publication numbers) of authors and scientific impact (i. e., citation rates) vary greatly.
conclusionThe field of BC continues to progress, whereby the influence of international co-operation on scientific progress is of increasing importance. New evaluation factors/tools have to be established for a more reliable evaluation of scientific work.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27315810What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.