Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38635076›Full record

ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2024

State of open science in cancer research.

Cristina Rius, Yiming Liu, Andrea Sixto-Costoya, Juan Carlos Valderrama-Zurián, Rut Lucas-Dominguez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Cristina RiusUISYS Group, Department of History of Science and Information Science, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Yiming LiuUISYS Group, Department of History of Science and Information Science, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Andrea Sixto-CostoyaUISYS Group, Department of History of Science and Information Science, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Juan Carlos Valderrama-ZuriánUISYS Group, Department of History of Science and Information Science, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain.
Rut Lucas-DominguezUISYS Group, Department of History of Science and Information Science, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. Rut.Lucas@uv.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4697-7832

Funding

CIBERONC CB16/12/00350Conselleria de Innovación, Universidades, Ciencia y Sociedad Digital, Generalitat Valenciana AICO/2020/010Conselleria de Innovación, Universidades, Ciencia y Sociedad Digital, Generalitat Valenciana CIAICO/2021/205National R+D+I of the Ministry of Science and Innovation of the Spanish Government PID2019-108579RB-I00Spanish Ministry of Equality MUJER-PI-41-2-ID22
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study has been focused on assessing the Open Science scenario of cancer research during the period 2011-2021, in terms of the derived scientific publications and raw data dissemination.

methodsA cancer search equation was executed in the Science Citation Index-Expanded, collecting the papers signed by at least one Spanish institution. The same search strategy was performed in the Data Citation Index to describe dataset diffusion.

results50,822 papers were recovered, 71% of which belong to first and second quartile journals. 59% of the articles were published in Open Access (OA) journals. The Open Access model and international collaboration positively conditioned the number of citations received. Among the most productive journals stood out Plos One, Cancers, and Clinical and Translational Oncology. 2693 genomics, proteomics and metabolomics datasets were retrieved, being Gene Expression Omnibus the favoured repository.

conclusionsThere has been an increase in oncology publications in Open Access. Most were published in first quartile journals and received higher citations than non-Open Access articles, as well as when oncological investigation was performed between international research teams, being relevant in the context of Open Science. Genetic repositories have been the preferred for sharing oncology datasets. Further investigation of research and data sharing in oncology is needed, supported by stronger Open Science policies, to achieve better data sharing practices among three scientific main pillars: researchers, publishers, and scientific organizations.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchInformation DisseminationNeoplasmsAccess to InformationBibliometricsHumansMedical OncologyOpen Access PublishingPeriodicals as TopicSpainCancer researchData sharingOpen accessOpen scienceScientific impact

Identifiers

PMID38635076
PMCPMC11410906

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.