Trends analysis of cancer topic of Cochrane Systematic Reviews: a bibliometric analysis

Article type
Authors
Yang K1, Gao Y2, Cai Y1, Liu M2, Wang B3, Shang Y4, Tian J1
1Evidence-Based Nursing Center, School of Nursing, Lanzhou University
2Evidence-Based Medicine Center, School of Basic Medical Sciences, Lanzhou University
3Gansu Province Hospital Rehabilitation Center
4Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou University
Abstract
Background: bibliometric analysis focuses on the bibliometric characteristics of research in a particular field, helping investigators grasp the development priorities and trends in the field and guiding their follow-up work. In order to assess trends in research activities on the topic of cancer in Cochrane Systematic Reviews (SRs), we used bibliometric analysis.

Objectives: to comprehensively analyze the scientific outputs of the topic of cancer in Cochrane SRs.

Methods: we retrieved the Cochrane Database of Systematic Review (CDSR) and Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) from 1 January 2009 to 12 December 2018. We applied CiteSpace IV and Excle 2018 to analyze and visualize the literature information, including countries, institutes, co-cited journals/books, co-cited references and keywords.

Results: ultimately, we retrieved 607 Cochrane SRs, involving 32 countries, 179 institutions and 260 authors. The number of Cochrane cancer-related SRs published has been increasing over the past decades (25 (2009) to 77 (2019)). UK, USA, Canada, Australia, and Germany worked closely with other countries, especially the UK (n = 361), which has taken the lead in this field. The top 10 contributive institutions, which were almost all from high-income countries, collaborated closely with other institutions, except for Sichuan University and University of Nottingham. CDSR, C Hdb Sys and Journal of Clinical Oncology were the top three journals/books with the highest co-citations. The top three co-cited references were the two different versions of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of interventions and Review Manager. The biggest cluster of keywords “cytoreductive surgery (CRS)” and the latest clusters “visual inspection” and “non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug” were the most promising hotspots.

Conclusions: cancer research is increasing in CDSR. More attention and funding support need to be paid to low- to middle-income countries. Co-cited references constituted the knowledge base of Cochrane SRs on cancer topics in the aspect of the methodology studies of systematic review, epidemiological data of cancer, and the reporting guideline of systematic reviews. What’s more, the adjuvant therapy combined CRS, the screening of skin cancer and the management of cancer-related pain were the hotspots that needed more sufficient evidence to support clinical decision making.

Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: patients and healthcare consumers were not involved in this work.