ArticleCancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)2023
Global trends in oncology research: A mixed-methods study of publications and clinical trials from 2010 to 2019.
Article in Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prehospital data in the dark: a scoping review of the widening gap between EMS demand and the evidence to meet it.International journal of emergency medicine · 2026Review
- Trainee-Led Case-Based Learning in Medical Oncology: A Feasibility Study.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2026Article
- A systematic analysis of the gender disparities in oncology journal editorial boards.Research integrity and peer review · 2026Article
- A literature review and reflection on clinical trials: current challenges, future directions, and potential strategies to overcome practical barriers.AME clinical trials review · 2026Article
- Towards constructing a generalized structural 3D breathing human lung model based on experimental volumes, pressures, and strains.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Inferring gender from first names: Comparing the accuracy of Genderize, Gender API, and the gender R package on authors of diverse nationality.PLOS digital health · 2024Article
- Global trends in oncology research: A mixed-methods study of publications and clinical trials from 2010 to 2019.Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the cancer research effort of some major countries over two 5-year periods (2010-2014 and 2015-2019) on the basis of scientific publications and interventional clinical trial metrics and to analyze the relationship between research effort and cancer burden (incidence and mortality). MATERIALS AND
methodsClinical trials were extracted from ClinicalTrials.gov using a specific query. Publications were identified in Web of Science (WoS) using a query based on keywords and were then analyzed using InCites, a bibliometric tool. Bibliometric indicators were computed per country and per period.
resultsDuring 2010-2019, 1 120 821 cancer-related publications were identified in WoS, with 447 900 and 672 921 (+50%) articles respectively published in 2010-2014 and 2015-2019. Meanwhile, 38% and 7% of the articles were published in oncology and cell biology journals, respectively. Exactly 30% of the published articles were contributed by the USA. In the study period, China strongly increased its production and overspecialization. Apart from China, which had a low normalized citation impact (NCI), almost all countries increased their NCIs; in particular, France's NCI increased from 1.69 to 2.44. As for clinical trials, over 36 856 were opened worldwide during that period. Over 17 000 (46.5%) opened in the USA, which remained the leader during the study period. China ranked second worldwide in terms of the number of open trials in 2015-2019. Results revealed that the 17 cancer localizations versus cancer burden and research effort showed no evident relationship.
conclusionThe results may provide a scientific basis for decision making for continued research. Based on bibliometric data, this type of study will aid public health policymaking and lead to a more transparent public fund allocation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.