ArticlePloS one2022
Bibliometric analysis of hotspots and frontiers in cancer-related fatigue among ovarian cancer survivors.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- The current trend of exosome in epithelial ovarian cancer studies: A bibliometric review.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Pooled it
- Development and validation of a machine learning-based risk prediction model for cancer-related fatigue in ovarian cancer patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Bibliometric analysis of global research on liquid biopsy for gastric cancer.Discover oncology · 2025Article
- Research Hotspots and Frontiers of Patient Delay: A Bibliometric Analysis from 2000 to 2023.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2024Article
- Application of medical imaging in ovarian cancer: a bibliometric analysis from 2000 to 2022.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Quantitative analysis of studies that use artificial intelligence on spinal diseases: A bibliometric analysis.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo explore and analyze research hotspots and frontiers in CRF in ovarian cancer patients to provide an evidence-based basis for scholars and policymakers.
backgroundOvarian cancer is one of the most common and lethal gynecological malignancies. Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is an annoying and pervasive side-effect that seriously affects the activities of daily living and decreases the quality of life (QoL) of cancer survivors.
methodsThe literature was retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) from inception to 2021-12-31. CiteSpace was used to discuss research countries, institutions, authors, and keywords.
resultsThis study ultimately included 755 valid publications, and the number of publications showed a gradual upward trend. The countries, institutions, authors, and journals that have published the most articles and cited the most frequently were the United States, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Michael Friedlander and Amit M Oza, Gynecologic Oncology, and Journal of Clinical Oncology. The top three high-frequency keywords were Ovarian cancer, chemotherapy, and clinical trial. The top three keywords with the strongest citation bursts were cyclophosphamide, double-blind, and open-label.
conclusionsConducting multi-center, large-sample, randomized controlled clinical trials to determine whether chemotherapeutic agents have severe adverse effects and to discuss the relationship between CRF and QoL and overall survival in cancer survivors are hotspots in this field. The new trends may be applying double-blind, randomized controlled trials to clarify the causes of CRF and open-label, randomized trials to determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of chemotherapeutic agents.
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.