IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v93y2012i1d10.1007_s11192-012-0633-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The evaluation of Indian cancer research, 1990–2010

Author

Listed:
  • Grant Lewison

    (Guy’s Hospital Campus)

  • Philip Roe

    (Evaluametrics Ltd)

Abstract

Cancer research outputs in India have expanded greatly in recent years, with some concomitant increase in their citation scores. Part of the increase in output is attributable to greater coverage in the Web of Science of Indian journals, which are more clinical than international ones, and much less often cited. Other measures of esteem have also increased, such as the percentage of reviews and the immediacy with which Indian cancer articles are cited. Most of the output came from just nine of the 35 Indian states and Union Territories, led by New Delhi and Maharashtra. The distribution of the amount of research by cancer site correlates moderately positively with the relative disease burden, with mouth (head and neck) cancer (often caused by the chewing of tobacco or areca, betel or paan) causing the highest number of deaths and also being well researched. We also analysed the articles by type of research, with articles in genetics and chemotherapy being the most numerous. For articles published in 2009–2010, data were available on the funding acknowledgements, and we found, as expected, that articles in clinical subjects were less often supported by external funding than ones in basic research. The major source of support was the Government of India, with relatively small contributions from charities and industry, unlike the situation in the UK and other western European countries.

Suggested Citation

  • Grant Lewison & Philip Roe, 2012. "The evaluation of Indian cancer research, 1990–2010," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 93(1), pages 167-181, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:93:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0633-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-012-0633-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-012-0633-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-012-0633-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. López-Illescas, Carmen & de Moya-Anegón, Félix & Moed, Henk F., 2008. "Coverage and citation impact of oncological journals in the Web of Science and Scopus," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 304-316.
    2. Grant Lewison, 2009. "The percentage of reviews in research output: a simple measure of research esteem," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 25-37, March.
    3. Grant Lewison & Guillermo Paraje, 2004. "The classification of biomedical journals by research level," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(2), pages 145-157, June.
    4. Grant Lewison & Valentina Markusova, 2010. "The evaluation of Russian cancer research," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(2), pages 129-144, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Grant Lewison & Richard Sullivan, 2015. "Conflicts of interest statements on biomedical papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2151-2159, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Grant Lewison & Richard Sullivan, 2015. "Conflicts of interest statements on biomedical papers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(3), pages 2151-2159, March.
    2. Grant Lewison & Valentina Markusova, 2011. "Female researchers in Russia: have they become more visible?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 89(1), pages 139-152, October.
    3. Boyack, Kevin W. & Patek, Michael & Ungar, Lyle H. & Yoon, Patrick & Klavans, Richard, 2014. "Classification of individual articles from all of science by research level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12.
    4. de Oliveira, Renan Peres & Lohmann, Gui & Oliveira, Alessandro V.M., 2022. "A systematic review of the literature on air transport networks (1973-2021)," Journal of Air Transport Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    5. Thed Leeuwen & Rodrigo Costas & Clara Calero-Medina & Martijn Visser, 2013. "The role of editorial material in bibliometric research performance assessments," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 95(2), pages 817-828, May.
    6. Gloria Alexandra Ortiz Rocha & Maria Angelica Pichimata & Edwin Villagran, 2021. "Research on the Microclimate of Protected Agriculture Structures Using Numerical Simulation Tools: A Technical and Bibliometric Analysis as a Contribution to the Sustainability of Under-Cover Cropping," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-40, September.
    7. Bar-Ilan, Judit, 2008. "Informetrics at the beginning of the 21st century—A review," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-52.
    8. Khan, Muhammad Arif, 2022. "ESG disclosure and Firm performance: A bibliometric and meta analysis," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    9. Sameer Kumar & Jariah Mohd. Jan, 2014. "Research collaboration networks of two OIC nations: comparative study between Turkey and Malaysia in the field of ‘Energy Fuels’, 2009–2011," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(1), pages 387-414, January.
    10. Ma, Jing & Abrams, Natalie F. & Porter, Alan L. & Zhu, Donghua & Farrell, Dorothy, 2019. "Identifying translational indicators and technology opportunities for nanomedical research using tech mining: The case of gold nanostructures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 767-775.
    11. Anckaert, Paul-Emmanuel & Cassiman, David & Cassiman, Bruno, 2020. "Fostering practice-oriented and use-inspired science in biomedical research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    12. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    13. Dašić Predrag, 2015. "State and Analysis of Scientific Journals in the Field of “Economic Sciences” for the Period 1995-2014," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 53(4), pages 547-581, December.
    14. Liao, Chien Hsiang & Yen, Hsiuju Rebecca, 2012. "Quantifying the degree of research collaboration: A comparative study of collaborative measures," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1), pages 27-33.
    15. Michal Brzezinski, 2015. "Power laws in citation distributions: evidence from Scopus," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(1), pages 213-228, April.
    16. Valderrama-Zurián, Juan-Carlos & Aguilar-Moya, Remedios & Melero-Fuentes, David & Aleixandre-Benavent, Rafael, 2015. "A systematic analysis of duplicate records in Scopus," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 570-576.
    17. Ajay Aggarwal & Preeti Patel & Grant Lewison & Abdulkarim Ekzayez & Adam Coutts & Fouad M Fouad & Omar Shamieh & Rita Giacaman & Tezer Kutluk & Rima Abdul Khalek & Mark Lawler & Peter Boyle & Diana Sa, 2020. "The Profile of Non-Communicable Disease (NCD) research in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region: Analyzing the NCD burden, research outputs and international research collaboration," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, April.
    18. Joselyne Solórzano & Fernando Morante-Carballo & Néstor Montalván-Burbano & Josué Briones-Bitar & Paúl Carrión-Mero, 2022. "A Systematic Review of the Relationship between Geotechnics and Disasters," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-31, October.
    19. Panteng Wan & Kangning Xiong & Le Zhang, 2022. "Heterogeneity of Spatial-Temporal Distribution of Nitrogen in the Karst Rocky Desertification Soils and Its Implications for Ecosystem Service Support of the Desertification Control—A Literature Revie," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-15, May.
    20. Thelwall, Mike & Sud, Pardeep, 2016. "National, disciplinary and temporal variations in the extent to which articles with more authors have more impact: Evidence from a geometric field normalised citation indicator," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 48-61.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:93:y:2012:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-012-0633-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.