Prostate Cancer Research: A Bibliometric Study of India and Iran

University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) Libraries at University of Nebraska-Lincoln 3-11-2021 Prostate Cancer Research: A Bibliometric Study of India and Iran Rabiya Mushtaq University of Kashmir, Srinagar, J&K, India, [email protected] Fayaz Ahmad Loan University of Kashmir, Srinagar, J&K, India, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac Part of the Health Sciences and Medical Librarianship Commons Mushtaq, Rabiya and Loan, Fayaz Ahmad, "Prostate Cancer Research: A Bibliometric Study of India and Iran" (2021). Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). 5282. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/5282 Prostate Cancer Research: A Bibliometric Study of India and Iran Dr. Rabiya Mushtaq Centre of Central Asian Studies University of Kashmir, India [email protected] Dr. Fayaz Ahmad Loan Documentation Officer Centre of Central Asian Studies University of Kashmir, India Corresponding author: [email protected] ABSTRACT The study aims to provide an insight into the global research productivity in prostate cancer with an in-depth analysis of the growth & development of India and Iran. The study focuses on the authorship collaborative patterns among Indian and Iranian medical scientists as well. The study was commenced with the selection of terms on “Prostate cancer”. Three termsProstate Cancer, Prostate Neoplasm, and Prostatic Neoplasm were selected from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) to retrieve the data from the Web of Science (WoS). The Boolean Operator “OR” was executed to retrieve the records. The data related to prostate cancer research from 1989-2017 was retrieved and downloaded in the excel file. Later, Microsoft Excel software was used to analyze the data. Three important means- annual growth rate (AGR), relative growth rate (RGR), and Doubling Time (DT) have been used to trace the development of literature from 1989 to 2017. Further, authorship patterns were analyzed using the authorship collaboration and collaborative coefficient methods. The annual growth rate is slow in the onset as compared to the later years, which is a positive sign of the improvement in the research productivity of India and Iran while as relative growth rate shows a decrease, doubling time shows an increasing trend in both nations towards the end of 2017. Authors prefer to work in collaboration rather than individually as is evident from the values of Collaboration Coefficient and Degree of Collaboration. Keywords: Prostate Cancer, Prostate Neoplasm, Prostatic Neoplasm, Research Productivity, Scientometrics, Bibliometrics INTRODUCTION Prostate Cancer is defined as the malignant Tumour that arises in the prostate gland. Prostate Cancer is the second most common cancer affecting males all over the globe. The highest Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) ISSN 1522-0222 cases were reported in Martinique. More cases, about 68 percent were reported in developed nations (Cancer Statistics, 2018). Therefore, the research is conducted worldwide on prostate cancer. In Library and Information Science, Bibliometrics helps in the measurement of research output. Prostate Cancer source: hopkinsmrdicine.org REVIEW OF LITERATURE The prostate gland a very vital component of the reproductive system is greatly under the bad effect of cancer disease. Many studies have been carried out to understand the nature of publication patterns in Oncology Mushtaq and Loan (2019) studied the research productivity of Colorectal Cancer research output in the context of India and Iran. It was revealed that there existed a positive relationship between gross domestic product of nations and research productivity and the calculated values of relative growth rate and annual growth rate were encouraging. Further, the study strongly advocated the greater tendency of the two nations towards teamwork. Mushtaq and Loan (2021) further studied the literature growth of lung cancer in India and Iran and concluded that there is a strong and considerable relationship between the Gross Domestic Production (GDP) of nations and publication productivity. The annual growth rate shows improvement while as relative growth rate shows a decrease, doubling time shows an increasing trend in both nations towards the end of 2017. Authors prefer to work in collaboration rather than individually. However, Gupta and Gupta (2015) examined publications on prostate cancer covered in the Scopus database during 2004-13. In global research output, many countries contributed of which the top 15 accounts for 94.80% share of the global output during 2004-13. The prominent contributing nations were the Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) ISSN 1522-0222 United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, Italy, Japan, and China. India's global publication share was 1.52% and hold 14th rank in global publication output during 2004-13. The Indian prostate cancer output came from several organizations and authors, of which the top 20 contributed 41.81% and 24.05% share, respectively. India's international collaborative share in prostate cancer was 23.39%, which decreased from 24.42% to 22.98% from 2004-08 to 2009-13. Among the Indian states and union territories contributing to prostate cancer research during 2004-13, the largest publication share (16.52%) comes from Delhi, followed by Maharashtra (15.35%), Uttar Pradesh (15.06%), Tamil Nadu (10.89%), Andhra Pradesh (7.38%), Karnataka (6.94%), Chandigarh (5.12%), West Bengal (4.61%), Punjab (2.41%), Haryana and Kerala (2.05% each), Madhya Pradesh (1.75%), Rajasthan (1.61%) and Pondicherry(0.51%) respectively. Bendels, Costrut, Schoffel, Bruggmann, and Groneberg (2018) studied the research contribution to prostate cancer based on gender and concluded that female authors lack representation to a greater extent in the prostate cancer research as the publication count to the female authors remained comparatively lower than that of male authors. In the multi-authorship pattern, male authors play the key role, however; the study further suggested the coherence or balancing of the gender disparity in the future in the said area of study. In nutshell, prostate cancer shares a greater share in the mortality rate. The research output in this area of knowledge is quite encouraging. The developed nations continue to be in the limelight in terms of productivity however, India being a developing nation has a growing publication activity in this area as well. Regarding gender, female authors are less productive in this subject. RESEARCH DESIGN a) Objectives 1. To identify the prominent nations contributing to prostate cancer research globally. 2. To identify the annual growth rate, relative growth rate, and doubling time of the prostate cancer literature in India and Iran; and 3. To identify the collaborative authorship patterns of Indian and Iranian authors in prostate cancer using the degree of collaboration and collaborative coefficient methods. b) Methodology The research started with the selection of the terms. Three terms- Prostate Cancer, Prostate Neoplasm, and Prostatic Neoplasm were selected from the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) to retrieve the data from the Web of Science (WOS) maintained by Thomson Reuters. The Boolean Operator "OR" was executed to retrieve records. The data related to Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) ISSN 1522-0222 prostate cancer research from 1989-2017 was retrieved and downloaded in the excel file. The records of India and Iran were retrieved by restricting the country to India and Iran respectively. Later, MS Excel software was used to analyze the data. c) Limitations The data has been retrieved from a single database (Web of Science) only. There may be a substantial amount of non-reported research in other databases like Scopus as well. DATA ANALYSIS 1. Ranking of Countries in Prostate Cancer In Prostate Cancer, the USA (105,603; 44.77%) leads the list followed by China (17,157; 7.27%) and Germany (16,200; 6.86%), United Kingdom (15,336; 6.49%) and Canada (13,556; 5.74%) respectively (Fig.1). India and Iran aren’t among the first 15 nations and stand at 16th position (3153; 1.33%) and 31st position (1056; 0.44%) respectively (Table 1). The findings are in tune with the studies carried out by Coccia and Wang (2015); Aggarwal, et al. (2016); Caglar, Demir, Kucukler, and Durmus (2016); Dwivedi, Garg, and Prasad (2017); and Yeung, Goto, and Leung (2017) and who find the USA contributing the highest number of publication in their fields of studies. Table 1: Position of India and Iran in Prostate Cancer Research Rank Nations Record Percentage 1 USA 105,603 44.77 2 China 17,157 7.27 3 Germany 16,200 6.86 4 United Kingdom 15,336 6.49 5 Canada 13,556 5.74 6 Italy 11,954 5.06 7 Japan 11,556 4.90 8 France 9,463 4.01 9 Australia 7,266 3.08 10 Netherlands 6,300 2.50 16 India 3,153 1.33 31 Iran 1056 0.44 Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) ISSN 1522-0222 Fig. 1. Spiral of Countries in Prostate Cancer Research USA 105603 Netherlands China 17157 6,300 Australia 7266 Germany France 9463 United Kingdom 15,336 16200 Japan 11556 Italy 11954 Canada 13556 2. Annual Growth Rate of India and Iran in Prostate Cancer Fig. 2: Annual Growth Rate in Prostate Cancer Research Publication Count 500 400 300 India 200 Iran 100 0 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Publication Years The research output concerning Prostate Cancer is considerable in the two countries. It is quite clear that about 3153 publications are published from India and 1056 from Iran. The last year (2017) marks the greatest number of publications for both the nations i.e.441 for India and 228 for Iran. India has published since 1989 whereas there is no publication activity from Iran during the first seven (7) years (1989 - 1995). In India, negative annual growth is observed in 1991,1994,1995,1996, 2000,2003,2005, 2009, and 2017, whereas in the case of Iran 2001, 2002,2008, 2012, and 2013 witnessed a negative annual growth rate. However, both nations have a positive annual growth rate during the rest of the years. The average Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) ISSN 1522-0222 growth rate of India is 31.12 whereas the average growth rate of Iran is 28.31 (Table 2). The positive growth rate is evident for a good number of years which is an encouraging notion depicting the improvement of research (Fig.2). 0 -25 0 333.33 -15.38 -45.45 -16.66 120 0 27.27 -28.57 90 31.57 -32 147.05 -4.76 57.5 31.74 71.08 -11.97 35.2 27.81 19.44 0.77 21.15 26.03 12.34 -1.12 108.72 Mean 31.12 Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 3 6 9 13 20 18 46 48 83 77 69 115 125 192 228 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 3 4 4 7 13 22 35 55 73 119 167 250 327 396 511 636 828 1,056 -50 -100 100 50 44 54 -10 156 4 73 -7 -10 67 9 54 19 48.00 Mean Publications Annual Growth Rate (AGR) Cumulative 4 8 11 14 27 38 44 49 60 71 85 95 114 139 156 198 238 301 384 526 651 820 1036 1294 1554 1869 2266 2712 3153 Annual Growth Rate (AGR) 1989-2017 4 4 3 3 13 11 6 5 11 11 14 10 19 25 17 42 40 63 83 142 125 169 216 258 260 315 397 446 441 Cumulative 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Publications Year Table 2: Annual Growth Rate of India and Iran in Prostate Cancer Research Period India Iran 28.31 ISSN 1522-0222 3. Relative Growth Rate (RGR) and Doubling Time (DT) in Prostate Cancer In order, to understand the growth and development of literature on prostate cancer annual growth rate, relative growth rate, and doubling time values are calculated. Annual Growth Rate can be calculated by using the formula: [(Last Value –Initial Value) ÷ Initial Value] 100 Relative Growth Rate (RGR) can simply be defined as the increase in the number of articles or pages per unit of time. The mean relative growth rate over a specific time interval can be calculated as follows: Relative Growth Rate (RGR) 1 - 2R=Log W2 – Log W1/ T2-T1 Whereas 1-2 R- mean relative growth rate over the specific period LogeW1 - log of the initial number of articles Loge W2- log of the final number of articles after a specific period T2-T1- the unit difference between the initial time and the final time Here a year is taken as the unit of time. Doubling time is calculated by 0.693/R. A brief idea of the Relative Growth Rate (RGR) and doubling time (DT) for Prostate Cancer research in India and Iran are provided in table (5.34). Prostate Cancer research output for India has shown the highest value of RGR (0.69) in the year 1989 since then it has decreased with fluctuations as the years 1996, 2000 and 2003 show the least value of 0.11 and the recent year (2017) expresses the relative growth rate of about 0.15. While for Iran, the highest value of relative growth rate is 1.09 in 2000 and the least value is evident in 2013 at 0.20, and in between variation in the values is quite evident. Doubling time of the literature from India is about 1 in the year 1990 and the years 1996, 2000, 2003 show the highest value of doubling time 6.3. In the case of Iran, the least value of DT is 0.63 in 2000 and the highest of 3.46 in 2013, and the year 2017 experiences a doubling time of 2.77. Doubling time shows a clear variation from the year of inception of publication to 2017. The mean RGR and DT for India are 0.238 and 3.49 respectively and the mean RGR and DT for Iran are 0.386 and 2.04 respectively (Table 3). Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) ISSN 1522-0222 Cumulative Cumulative Productivity Productivity Table 3: Relative Growth Rate (RGR) and Doubling Time (DT) in Prostate Cancer India Iran W1 W2 RGR DT W1 W2 RGR DT 4 4 - 1.38 - - 0 0 - - - - 4 8 1.38 2.07 0.69 1 0 0 - - - - 1991 3 11 2.07 2.39 0.32 2.16 0 0 - - - - 1992 3 14 2.39 2.63 0.24 2.88 0 0 - - - - 1993 13 27 2.63 3.29 0.66 1.05 0 0 - - - - 1994 11 38 3.29 3.63 0.34 2.03 0 0 - - - - 1995 6 44 3.63 3.78 0.15 4.62 0 0 - 0 - - 1996 5 49 3.78 3.89 0.11 6.3 1 1 0 0 - - 1997 11 60 3.89 4.09 0.2 3.46 0 1 0 0 - - 1998 11 71 4.09 4.26 0.17 4.07 0 1 0 0 - - 1999 14 85 4.26 4.44 0.18 3.85 0 1 0 0 - - 2000 10 95 4.44 4.55 0.11 6.3 2 3 0 1.09 1.09 0.63 2001 19 114 4.55 4.73 0.18 3.85 1 4 1.09 1.38 0.29 2.38 2002 25 139 4.73 4.93 0.2 3.46 0 4 1.38 1.38 0 - 2003 17 156 4.93 5.04 0.11 6.3 3 7 1.38 1.94 0.56 1.23 2004 42 198 5.04 5.28 0.24 2.88 6 13 1.94 2.56 0.62 1.11 2005 40 238 5.28 5.47 0.19 3.64 9 22 2.56 3.09 0.53 1.30 2006 63 301 5.47 5.70 0.23 3.01 13 35 3.09 3.55 0.46 1.50 2007 83 384 5.70 5.95 0.25 2.77 20 55 3.55 4.00 0.45 1.54 2008 142 526 5.95 6.26 0.31 2.23 18 73 4.00 4.29 0.29 2.38 2009 125 651 6.26 6.47 0.21 3.3 46 119 4.29 4.77 0.48 1.44 2010 169 820 6.47 6.70 0.23 3.01 48 167 4.77 5.11 0.34 2.03 2011 216 1036 6.70 6.94 0.24 2.88 83 250 5.11 5.52 0.41 1.69 2012 258 1294 6.94 7.16 0.22 3.15 77 327 5.52 5.78 0.26 2.66 2013 260 1554 7.16 7.34 0.18 3.85 69 396 5.78 5.98 0.20 3.46 2014 315 1869 7.34 7.53 0.19 3.64 115 511 5.98 6.23 0.25 2.77 2015 397 2266 7.53 7.72 0.19 3.64 125 636 6.23 6.45 0.22 3.15 2016 446 2712 7.72 7.90 0.18 3.85 192 828 6.45 6.71 0.26 2.66 2017 441 3153 7.90 8.05 1989Average (India) 2017 0.15 4.62 228 1056 6.71 6.96 0.25 2.77 0.238 3.49 0.386 2.04 Year 1989 1990 Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) Average (Iran) ISSN 1522-0222 4. Authorship patterns in Prostate cancer research in India and Iran a) Degree of Collaboration To understand the nature of authorship degree of collaboration and collaborative coefficient are calculated. Degree of collaboration C = Degree of collaboration NM = Number of multi-authored papers NS = Number of single-authored papers DC=NM / (NM+NS) Degree of Collaboration is a measure that reflects the extent of collaboration in research using the formula as suggested by Subramanyam (1983). It is clear from the data (table 4) that single authorship is the least choice of medical scientists in both nations in 28 years as less than 3% of the publications are single-authored in both countries. The degree of collaboration of both countries is very high, i.e. (0.97 for Iran and 0.97 for India). Karisiddappa, Maheswarappa & Shirol (1990), Bandyopadhyay (2001), and Biradar & Tadasad (2015) found similar results in Psychology, Mathematics, and Economics respectively. (b) Collaborative Coefficient To understand the nature of authorship in the two nations collaborative coefficient (CC) has been calculated as recommended by Ajiferuke, Burell, & Tague (1988) for both nations as: Fj = the number of authored papers CC =1 – 1 ∑𝑘 𝑗=1( 𝑗 )𝑓𝑗 𝑁 N = total number of research published; and k = the number of authors per paper Fj = the number of authored papers The value of the collaboration coefficient (CC) is above 0.60, i.e. (0.65 for India and 0.64 for Iran). This also confirms that both nations prefer multiple authorship patterns. Therefore, it can be inferred that teamwork is prominent in both nations which is an encouraging sign. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) ISSN 1522-0222 Country Table 4: Degree of Collaboration in India and Iran Total Collaborative Degree of SingleMultiPublications Coefficient Collaboration authored authored Publications Publications India 87 3,066 3,153 0.65 0.97 Iran 29 1,028 1,057 0.64 0.97 CONCLUSION The findings of the study show that there is a strong and considerable relationship between the Gross Domestic Production (GDP) of nations and publication productivity. The annual growth rate is slow in the onset as compared to the later years which is a positive sign of the improvement in the research of the two nations while as relative growth rate shows a decrease, doubling time shows an increasing trend in both nations towards the end of 2017. Authors like to work in collaboration rather than single authorship. This strongly advocates that there is a multi-disciplinary flavour in research in the field of prostate cancer in India and Iran. REFERENCES Aggarwal, A. et al (2016). The State of Lung Cancer Research: A Global Analysis. Journal of Thoracic Oncology, 11(7), 1040-1050. DOI: 10.106/ J.JTHO.2016.05.010. Ajiferuke, I., Burell, Q., & Tague, J. (1988). Collaborative coefficient: A single measure of the degree of collaboration in research. Scientometrics, 14(5-6), 421-433. DOI: 10.1007/bf02017100 Bendels, M. H., Costrut, A. M., Schoffel, N., Bruggmann, D., & Groneberg, D. A. (2018). Gender metrics of cancer research: Results from a global analysis on prostate cancer. Oncotarget, 9(28), 19640-19649. DOI:1018623/oncotarget. 24716 Bandyopadhyay, A.K. (2001). Authorship Pattern in Different Disciplines. Annals of Library and Information Studies, 48(4), (139-147). Retrieved from: http://nopr.niscair.res.in/bitstream/123456789/17909/1/ALIS%2048%284%29%2013 9-147.pdf Biradar, N., & Tadasad, P.G. (2015). Authorship Pattern and Collaborative Research in Economics. Journal of Indian Library Association, 51(4), 21-39. Retrieved from: https://www.ilaindia.net/jila/index.php/jila/article/view/22 Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) ISSN 1522-0222 Cancer Statistics. (2018). Global cancer data by country. Retrieved from https://www.wcrf.org/cancer statistics / data-cancer-frequency-country. Caglar, C., Durmus, M., Demir, E., & Kucukler, F. K. (2016). A bibliometric analysis of academic publication on diabetic retinopathy disease trends during 1980-2014: A global and medical view. International Journal of Ophthalmology, 9(11), 1663-1668. DOI:10.18240/ijo.2016.11.21 Coccia, M. & Wang, L. (2015). Path-breaking directions of nanotechnology-based chemotherapy and molecular cancer therapy. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 94, 155–169. DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2014.09.007 Dwivedi, S., Garg, K. C. and Prasad, H. N. (2017). Scientometric profile of global male breast cancer research. Current Science, 112(9),1814-1821. Retrieved from https://web.a.ebscohosst.com. Gupta, B. M., & Gupta, R. (2015). Prostate cancer research in India: A scientometric analysis of publications output during 2004-13. International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology, 3(1), 1-11. Retrieved from http://ijcto.org/index Karisiddappa, C.R. Maheswarappa, B.C. & Shirol, M.V (1990). Authorship Pattern and collaborative research in psychology. IASLIC Bulletin .35(2), 73-78. Kumar, R.S. (2016). Publications Trends in Nuclear Physics: A Global Perspective. Library Philosophy and Practice, Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/1361. Mushtaq, R. & Loan, F.A. (2019). Research Productivity in Colorectal Cancer- A Scientometric Study of India and Iran. International Journal of Knowledge Management and Practices, 7(1), 32-38. Retrieved from: http://publishingindia.com/ijkmp Mushtaq, R. & Loan, F.A.(2021). Lung Cancer Research in India and Iran: A Scientometric Study Library Philosophy and Practice, Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/4761 Subramanyam, K (1983). Bibliometric Studies of Research Collaboration: A Review. Journal of Information Science, 6, 33-38. DOI:10.1177/01655515830060010 Yeung, A. W., Goto, T. K., & Leung, W. K. (2017). A Bibliometric Review of Research Trends in Neuroimaging. Current Science, 112(4), 725-734. DOI:10.18520/cs/v112/i04/725-734 Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal) ISSN 1522-0222