Observational studyThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners2023
General practice-based cancer research publications: a bibliometric analysis 2013-2019.
Observational study in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A bibliometric review of depression among cancer patients in low- and middle-income countries.Discover mental health · 2026Review
- Global research trends of peripheral nerve surgery: a bibliometric and visualized analysis.Neurosurgical review · 2025Article
- Mapping intellectual structure and research hotspots of cancer studies in primary health care: A machine-learning-based analysis.Medicine · 2025Article
- Visualization of the relationship between fungi and cancer from the perspective of bibliometric analysis.Heliyon · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGeneral practice plays a critical role in the prevention, diagnosis, management, and survivorship care of patients with cancer. Mapping research outputs over time provides valuable insights into the evolving role of general practice in cancer care.
aimTo describe and compare the distribution of cancer in general practice research publications by country, cancer type, area of the cancer continuum, author sex, and journal impact factor. DESIGN AND
settingA bibliometric analysis using a systematic approach to identify publications.
methodMEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for studies published between 2013 and 2019, which reported on cancer in general practice. Included studies were mapped to the cancer continuum framework. Descriptive statistics were used to present data from the included studies.
resultsA total of 2798 publications were included from 714 journals, spanning 79 countries. The publication rate remained stable over this period. Overall, the US produced the most publications (
conclusionCancer in general practice is a stable field where research is predominantly observational. There is geographical variation in the focus of cancer in general practice research, which may reflect different priorities and levels of investment between countries. Overall, these results support future consideration of how to improve under-represented research areas and the design, conduct, and translation of interventional research.
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.