A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis of Cancer Screening Based on the Web of Science Core Collection Database

Articles in Press

Document Type : Review Article

Authors

1 Department of Clinical Pharmacy, the First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China

2 CUHK Business School, Hong Kong, China

Abstract

Background 
This study aimed to systematically analyze the current research status, development trends, collaborative networks, and hot topics in the global cancer screening field using a bibliometric method. It sought to reveal the contributions and influences of different countries and institutions and explore potential directions for future research, providing a comprehensive basis for academia and policy-makers to optimize cancer screening strategies.
 
Methods 
We searched the Web of Science Core Collection on October 15, 2023, using TS = (cancer screening) and DT = (Article), with no restrictions on the language or publication year. Only original research articles directly related to cancer screening were included; abstracts, comments, and non-research literature were excluded. VOSviewer was used for co-occurrence analysis to assess research status and hotspots. CiteSpace analyzed annual publication trends, collaboration networks among countries, institutions, journals, authors, and keywords.
 
Results 
A total of 5223 articles were retrieved, showing a continuous growth trend in annual publication volume. The USA had the highest output (2418), followed by the UK and the Netherlands. Harvard University was the most productive institution (183). Cancer published the most articles (120), while the New England Journal of Medicine had the most citations (7991). High-frequency keywords included screening (987), colorectal cancer (CRC) (783), mortality (680), women (671), and breast cancer (BC) (669). Cluster analysis revealed seven main research themes: CRC, cervical cancer (CC), lung cancer (LC), BC, cancer screening, human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination, and lynch syndrome. Hot topics included LC screening and adherence. Future research may increasingly focus on artificial intelligence (AI) and deep learning (DL), aiming to introduce new technologies and optimize screening strategies to improve efficiency and early diagnosis.
 
Conclusion 
Research on cancer screening is rapidly advancing, with the USA leading in productivity and influence. Current research mainly focuses on CRC, CC, LC, and BC. 

Keywords

References

  1. Sarma EA, Silver MI, Kobrin SC, Marcus PM, Ferrer RA. Cancer screening: health impact, prevalence, correlates, and interventions. Psychol Health. 2019;34(9):1036-1072. doi:1080/08870446.2019.1584673
  2. Simon JB. Occult blood screening for colorectal carcinoma: a critical review. Gastroenterology. 1985;88(3):820-837. doi:1016/0016-5085(85)90158-1
  3. Irons GV Jr, Kirsner JB. Routine chemical tests of the stool for occult blood: an evaluation. Am J Med Sci. 1965;249:247-260. doi:1097/00000441-196503000-00001
  4. Greegor DH. Diagnosis of large-bowel cancer in the asymptomatic patient. JAMA. 1967;201(12):943-945.
  5. Smith RA, Andrews KS, Brooks D, et al. Cancer screening in the United States, 2019: a review of current American Cancer Society guidelines and current issues in cancer screening. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(3):184-210. doi:3322/caac.21557
  6. Jacobs IJ, Menon U, Ryan A, et al. Ovarian cancer screening and mortality in the UK Collaborative Trial of Ovarian Cancer Screening (UKCTOCS): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10022):945-956. doi:1016/s0140-6736(15)01224-6
  7. Herman CR, Gill HK, Eng J, Fajardo LL. Screening for preclinical disease: test and disease characteristics. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002;179(4):825-831. doi:2214/ajr.179.4.1790825
  8. Roldan-Valadez E, Salazar-Ruiz SY, Ibarra-Contreras R, Rios C. Current concepts on bibliometrics: a brief review about impact factor, Eigenfactor score, CiteScore, SCImago Journal Rank, Source-Normalised Impact per Paper, H-index, and alternative metrics. Ir J Med Sci. 2019;188(3):939-951. doi:1007/s11845-018-1936-5
  9. Dekker E, Tanis PJ, Vleugels JLA, Kasi PM, Wallace MB. Colorectal cancer. Lancet. 2019;394(10207):1467-1480. doi:1016/s0140-6736(19)32319-0
  10. Issa IA, Noureddine M. Colorectal cancer screening: an updated review of the available options. World J Gastroenterol. 2017;23(28):5086-5096. doi:3748/wjg.v23.i28.5086
  11. Gupta S. Screening for colorectal cancer. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am. 2022;36(3):393-414. doi:1016/j.hoc.2022.02.001
  12. Quintero E, Castells A, Bujanda L, et al. Colonoscopy versus fecal immunochemical testing in colorectal-cancer screening. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(8):697-706. doi:1056/NEJMoa1108895
  13. Yang X, Zeng Z, Hou Y, et al. MicroRNA-92a as a potential biomarker in diagnosis of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e88745. doi:1371/journal.pone.0088745
  14. Guo S, Li L, Xu B, et al. A simple and novel fecal biomarker for colorectal cancer: ratio of Fusobacterium nucleatum to probiotics populations, based on their antagonistic effect. Clin Chem. 2018;64(9):1327-1337. doi:1373/clinchem.2018.289728
  15. Liang JQ, Li T, Nakatsu G, et al. A novel faecal Lachnoclostridium marker for the non-invasive diagnosis of colorectal adenoma and cancer. Gut. 2020;69(7):1248-1257. doi:1136/gutjnl-2019-318532
  16. Ladabaum U, Mannalithara A. Comparative effectiveness and cost effectiveness of a multitarget stool DNA test to screen for colorectal neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2016;151(3):427-439.e6. doi:1053/j.gastro.2016.06.003
  17. Knudsen AB, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, Rutter CM, et al. Cost-effectiveness of computed tomographic colonography screening for colorectal cancer in the Medicare population. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(16):1238-1252. doi:1093/jnci/djq242
  18. Ladabaum U, Allen J, Wandell M, Ramsey S. Colorectal cancer screening with blood-based biomarkers: cost-effectiveness of methylated septin 9 DNA versus current strategies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013;22(9):1567-1576. doi:1158/1055-9965.Epi-13-0204
  19. Peterse EF, Meester RG, de Jonge L, et al. Comparing the cost-effectiveness of innovative colorectal cancer screening tests. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2021;113(2):154-161. doi:1093/jnci/djaa103
  20. Vilos GA. The history of the Papanicolaou smear and the odyssey of George and Andromache Papanicolaou. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;91(3):479-483. doi:1016/s0029-7844(97)00695-9
  21. Michalas SP. The Pap test: George N. Papanicolaou (1883-1962). A screening test for the prevention of cancer of uterine cervix. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2000;90(2):135-138. doi:1016/s0301-2115(00)00260-8
  22. Schiffman M, Doorbar J, Wentzensen N, et al. Carcinogenic human papillomavirus infection. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2:16086. doi:1038/nrdp.2016.86
  23. de Sanjose S, Quint WG, Alemany L, et al. Human papillomavirus genotype attribution in invasive cervical cancer: a retrospective cross-sectional worldwide study. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(11):1048-1056. doi:1016/s1470-2045(10)70230-8
  24. Gavinski K, DiNardo D. Cervical cancer screening. Med Clin North Am. 2023;107(2):259-269. doi:1016/j.mcna.2022.10.006
  25. Casas CP, de Cássia Ribeiro de Albuquerque R, Loureiro RB, et al. Cervical cancer screening in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of economic evaluation studies. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2022;77:100080. doi:1016/j.clinsp.2022.100080
  26. Kash N, Lee MA, Kollipara R, Downing C, Guidry J, Tyring SK. Safety and efficacy data on vaccines and immunization to human papillomavirus. J Clin Med. 2015;4(4):614-633. doi:3390/jcm4040614
  27. Rayner M, Welp A, Stoler MH, Cantrell LA. Cervical cancer screening recommendations: now and for the future. Healthcare (Basel). 2023;11(16):2273. doi:3390/healthcare11162273
  28. Takes RP, Wierzbicka M, D'Souza G, et al. HPV vaccination to prevent oropharyngeal carcinoma: what can be learned from anogenital vaccination programs? Oral Oncol. 2015;51(12):1057-1060. doi:1016/j.oraloncology.2015.10.011
  29. Bruni L, Diaz M, Barrionuevo-Rosas L, et al. Global estimates of human papillomavirus vaccination coverage by region and income level: a pooled analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2016;4(7):e453-e463. doi:1016/s2214-109x(16)30099-7
  30. Zou Z, Fairley CK, Ong JJ, et al. Domestic HPV vaccine price and economic returns for cervical cancer prevention in China: a cost-effectiveness analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8(10):e1335-e1344. doi:1016/s2214-109x(20)30277-1
  31. Fontana RS, Sanderson DR, Taylor WF, et al. Early lung cancer detection: results of the initial (prevalence) radiologic and cytologic screening in the Mayo Clinic study. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1984;130(4):561-565. doi:1164/arrd.1984.130.4.561
  32. Melamed MR, Flehinger BJ, Zaman MB, Heelan RT, Perchick WA, Martini N. Screening for early lung cancer. Results of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering study in New York. Chest. 1984;86(1):44-53. doi:1378/chest.86.1.44
  33. Aberle DR, Adams AM, Berg CD, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with low-dose computed tomographic screening. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(5):395-409. doi:1056/NEJMoa1102873
  34. de Koning HJ, van der Aalst CM, de Jong PA, et al. Reduced lung-cancer mortality with volume CT screening in a randomized trial. N Engl J Med. 2020;382(6):503-513. doi:1056/NEJMoa1911793
  35. Ren W, Chen M, Qiao Y, Zhao F. Global guidelines for breast cancer screening: a systematic review. Breast. 2022;64:85-99. doi:1016/j.breast.2022.04.003
  36. Nelson HD, Fu R, Cantor A, Pappas M, Daeges M, Humphrey L. Effectiveness of breast cancer screening: systematic review and meta-analysis to update the 2009 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation. Ann Intern Med. 2016;164(4):244-255. doi:7326/m15-0969
  37. Alonso Roca S, Delgado Laguna AB, Arantzeta Lexarreta J, Cajal Campo B, Santamaría Jareño S. Screening in patients with increased risk of breast cancer (part 1): pros and cons of MRI screening. Radiologia (Engl Ed). 2020;62(4):252-265. doi:1016/j.rx.2020.01.007
  38. Chong A, Weinstein SP, McDonald ES, Conant EF. Digital breast tomosynthesis: concepts and clinical practice. Radiology. 2019;292(1):1-14. doi:1148/radiol.2019180760
  39. Waller J, DeStefano K, Dempsey J, Leckron J, Tucker A, Umair M. A primer to cost-effectiveness analysis in breast cancer imaging: a review of the literature. Cureus. 2022;14(8):e28356. doi:7759/cureus.28356
  40. Morgan MB, Mates JL. Applications of artificial intelligence in breast imaging. Radiol Clin North Am. 2021;59(1):139-148. doi:1016/j.rcl.2020.08.007
  41. Pehrson LM, Nielsen MB, Ammitzbøl Lauridsen C. Automatic pulmonary nodule detection applying deep learning or machine learning algorithms to the LIDC-IDRI database: a systematic review. Diagnostics (Basel). 2019;9(1):29. doi:3390/diagnostics9010029
  42. Cui X, Zheng S, Heuvelmans MA, et al. Performance of a deep learning-based lung nodule detection system as an alternative reader in a Chinese lung cancer screening program. Eur J Radiol. 2022;146:110068. doi:1016/j.ejrad.2021.110068
  43. Wang P, Berzin TM, Glissen Brown JR, et al. Real-time automatic detection system increases colonoscopic polyp and adenoma detection rates: a prospective randomised controlled study. Gut. 2019;68(10):1813-1819. doi:1136/gutjnl-2018-317500
  44. Kim S, An H, Cho HW, et al. Pivotal clinical study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of assistive artificial intelligence-based software for cervical cancer diagnosis. J Clin Med. 2023;12(12):4024. doi:3390/jcm12124024
  45. Kinar Y, Kalkstein N, Akiva P, et al. Development and validation of a predictive model for detection of colorectal cancer in primary care by analysis of complete blood counts: a binational retrospective study. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016;23(5):879-890. doi:1093/jamia/ocv195
  46. Gupta P, Gulzar Z, Hsieh B, Lim A, Watson D, Mei R. Analytical validation of the CellMax platform for early detection of cancer by enumeration of rare circulating tumor cells. J Circ Biomark. 2019;8:1849454419899214. doi:1177/1849454419899214
  47. Honein-AbouHaidar GN, Kastner M, Vuong V, et al. Systematic review and meta-study synthesis of qualitative studies evaluating facilitators and barriers to participation in colorectal cancer screening. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2016;25(6):907-917. doi:1158/1055-9965.Epi-15-0990
  48. Fedewa SA, Goodman M, Flanders WD, et al. Elimination of cost-sharing and receipt of screening for colorectal and breast cancer. Cancer. 2015;121(18):3272-3280. doi:1002/cncr.29494
  49. Carrozzi G, Sampaolo L, Bolognesi L, et al. Cancer screening uptake: association with individual characteristics, geographic distribution, and time trends in Italy. Epidemiol Prev. 2015;39(3 Suppl 1):9-18.
International Journal of Health Policy and Management

Articles in Press, Corrected Proof
Available Online from 15 September 2025

Files

History

  • Received Date: 24 April 2024
  • Revised Date: 18 July 2025
  • Accepted Date: 31 August 2025
  • First Published Date: 15 September 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics