MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308881984 · doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2022-009849

Cancer research across Africa: a comparative bibliometric analysis

2022· article· en· W4308881984 on OpenAlexaff
Miriam Mutebi, Grant Lewison, Ajay Aggarwal, Olusegun Isaac Alatise, Christopher M. Booth, Miska Cira, Surbhi Grover, Ophira Ginsburg, Julie R. Gralow, Serine Gueye, Benda Kithaka, T. Peter Kingham, Lofti Kochbati, Jennifer Moodley, Sulma I. Mohammed, Alex Mutombo, Ntokozo Ndlovu, Christian Ntizimira, Groesbeck P. Parham, Fiona M Walter, Jeannette Parkes, Delva Shamely, Nazik Hammad, Janet Seeley, Julie Torode, Richard Sullivan, Verna Vanderpuye

Bibliographic record

VenueBMJ Global Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicscientometrics and bibliometrics research
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteScience and Technology Facilities CouncilWellcome TrustWorld Health Organization
KeywordsContext (archaeology)BibliometricsStakeholderPolitical scienceGeographyRegional scienceMedicineLibrary scienceComputer sciencePublic relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Research is a critical pillar in national cancer control planning. However, there is a dearth of evidence for countries to implement affordable strategies. The WHO and various Commissions have recommended developing stakeholder-based needs assessments based on objective data to generate evidence to inform national and regional prioritisation of cancer research needs and goals. METHODOLOGY: Bibliometric algorithms (macros) were developed and validated to assess cancer research outputs of all 54 African countries over a 12-year period (2009-2020). Subanalysis included collaboration patterns, site and domain-specific focus of research and understanding authorship dynamics by both position and sex. Detailed subanalysis was performed to understand multiple impact metrics and context relative outputs in comparison with the disease burden as well as the application of a funding thesaurus to determine funding resources. RESULTS: African countries in total published 23 679 cancer research papers over the 12-year period (2009-2020) with the fractional African contribution totalling 16 201 papers and the remaining 7478 from authors from out with the continent. The total number of papers increased rapidly with time, with an annual growth rate of 15%. The 49 sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries together published just 5281 papers, of which South Africa's contribution was 2206 (42% of the SSA total, 14% of all Africa) and Nigeria's contribution was 997 (19% of the SSA total, 4% of all Africa). Cancer research accounted for 7.9% of all African biomedical research outputs (African research in infectious diseases was 5.1 times than that of cancer research). Research outputs that are proportionally low relative to their burden across Africa are paediatric, cervical, oesophageal and prostate cancer. African research mirrored that of Western countries in terms of its focus on discovery science and pharmaceutical research. The percentages of female researchers in Africa were comparable with those elsewhere, but only in North African and some Anglophone countries. CONCLUSIONS: There is an imbalance in relevant local research generation on the continent and cancer control efforts. The recommendations articulated in our five-point plan arising from these data are broadly focused on structural changes, for example, overt inclusion of research into national cancer control planning and financial, for example, for countries to spend 10% of a notional 1% gross domestic expenditure on research and development on cancer.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.126
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics, Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch, Bibliometrics
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.396
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1260.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.7030.991
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.000
Open science0.0050.004
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.867
GPT teacher head0.762
Teacher spread0.105 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMJ Global HealthSame topicscientometrics and bibliometrics researchFrench-language works237,207