Global Research Mapping of Psycho-Oncology Between 1980 and 2021: A Bibliometric Analysis.

Background and Aim: Psycho-oncology is a cross-disciplinary and collaborative sub-specialty of oncology that focuses on the psychological, behavioral, ethical, and social aspects of cancer in clinical settings. The aim of this bibliometric study was to analyze and characterize the research productivity and trends in psycho-oncology between 1980 and 2021. Methodology: In May 2022, the Scopus® database was searched for psycho-oncology-related publications using predetermined search keywords with specific restrictions. Lotka's law was applied to check the authors' productivity, while Bradford's law was used to assess the core journals in this field. The data was analyzed for different bibliometric indicators in the Biblioshiny package, an RStudio tool for bibliometric analysis. Results: The initial search resulted in a total of 2,906 publications. Of which, 1,832 publications were included in the final analysis, published between 1980 and 2021. The analyzed publications were written by 7,363 authors from 74 countries and published in 490 journals. There has been a significant increase in psycho-oncology-related publications after 2010. The most productive year was 2021 (n = 365). The annual scientific growth rate was found to be 13.9%. The most relevant leading author in terms of publications was Luigi Grassi from the University of Ferrara, Italy (n = 42). Lotka's law found that the number of authors declined as the number of papers written increased. The core journals were Psycho-Oncology, Supportive Care in Cancer, and Journal of Psychosocial Oncology. The most frequently used author's keywords other than searching keywords were cancer, oncology, quality of life, depression, and anxiety. Recent psycho-oncology-related topics included mental health, COVID-19 infection in humans, people, pandemic, and tumor. The University of Sydney was the top-ranked institution. The leading country in terms of publications, citations, corresponding author country, and international collaboration was the United States of America (United States). The United States had the strongest collaboration with Australia and Canada. Conclusion: The research hotspots include mental health conditions and interventions in cancer patients. We identified international collaboration and research expenditure to be strongly associated with psycho-oncology research productivity. Researchers' collaboration, which is visible among developed countries, should be extended to low-income countries in order to expand psycho-oncology-related research and understanding.

Global Research Mapping of Psycho-Oncology Between 1980 and 2021: A Bibliometric Analysis

Background and Aim Psycho-oncology is a cross-disciplinary and collaborative sub-specialty of oncology that focuses on the psychological, behavioral, ethical, and social aspects of cancer in clinical settings. The aim of this bibliometric study was to analyze and characterize the research productivity and trends in psycho-oncology between 1980 and 2021. Methodology In May 2022, the Scopus® database was searched for psycho-oncology-related publications using predetermined search keywords with specific restrictions. Lotka’s law was applied to check the authors’ productivity, while Bradford’s law was used to assess the core journals in this field. The data was analyzed for different bibliometric indicators in the Biblioshiny package, an RStudio tool for bibliometric analysis. Results The initial search resulted in a total of 2,906 publications. Of which, 1,832 publications were included in the final analysis, published between 1980 and 2021. The analyzed publications were written by 7,363 authors from 74 countries and published in 490 journals. There has been a significant increase in psycho-oncology-related publications after 2010. The most productive year was 2021 (n = 365). The annual scientific growth rate was found to be 13.9%. The most relevant leading author in terms of publications was Luigi Grassi from the University of Ferrara, Italy (n = 42). Lotka’s law found that the number of authors declined as the number of papers written increased. The core journals were Psycho-Oncology, Supportive Care in Cancer, and Journal of Psychosocial Oncology. The most frequently used author’s keywords other than searching keywords were cancer, oncology, quality of life, depression, and anxiety. Recent psycho-oncology-related topics included mental health, COVID-19 infection in humans, people, pandemic, and tumor. The University of Sydney was the top-ranked institution. The leading country in terms of publications, citations, corresponding author country, and international collaboration was the United States of America (United States). The United States had the strongest collaboration with Australia and Canada. Conclusion The research hotspots include mental health conditions and interventions in cancer patients. We identified international collaboration and research expenditure to be strongly associated with psycho-oncology research productivity. Researchers’ collaboration, which is visible among developed countries, should be extended to low-income countries in order to expand psycho-oncology-related research and understanding.

SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 Research Trend during the First Two Years of the Pandemic in the United Arab Emirates: A PRISMA-Compliant Bibliometric Analysis.

Scientific research is an integral part of fighting the COVID-19 pandemic. This bibliometric analysis describes the COVID-19 research productivity of the United Arab Emirates (UAE)-affiliated researchers during the first two years of the pandemic, 2020 to 2022. The Web of Science Core Collection (WoSCC) database was utilized to retrieve publications related to COVID-19 published by UAE-affiliated researcher(s). A total of 1008 publications met the inclusion criteria and were included in this bibliometric analysis. The most studied broad topics were general internal medicine (11.9%), public environmental occupational health (7.8%), pharmacology/pharmacy (6.3%), multidisciplinary sciences (5%), and infectious diseases (3.4%). About 67% were primary research articles, 16% were reviews, and the remaining were editorials letters (11.5%), meeting abstracts/proceedings papers (5%), and document corrections (0.4%). The University of Sharjah was the leading UAE-affiliated organization achieving 26.3% of the publications and funding 1.8% of the total 1008 published research. This study features the research trends in COVID-19 research affiliated with the UAE and shows the future directions. There was an observable nationally and international collaboration of the UAE-affiliated authors, particularly with researchers from the USA and England. This study highlights the need for in-depth systematic reviews addressing the specific COVID-19 research-related questions and studied populations.

Immune Profiling of COVID-19 in Correlation with SARS and MERS.

Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a major complication of the respiratory illness coronavirus disease 2019, with a death rate reaching up to 40%. The main underlying cause of ARDS is a cytokine storm that results in a dysregulated immune response. This review discusses the role of cytokines and chemokines in SARS-CoV-2 and its predecessors SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, with particular emphasis on the elevated levels of inflammatory mediators that are shown to be correlated with disease severity. For this purpose, we reviewed and analyzed clinical studies, research articles, and reviews published on PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. This review illustrates the role of the innate and adaptive immune responses in SARS, MERS, and COVID-19 and identifies the general cytokine and chemokine profile in each of the three infections, focusing on the most prominent inflammatory mediators primarily responsible for the COVID-19 pathogenesis. The current treatment protocols or medications in clinical trials were reviewed while focusing on those targeting cytokines and chemokines. Altogether, the identified cytokines and chemokines profiles in SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2 provide important information to better understand SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis and highlight the importance of using prominent inflammatory mediators as markers for disease diagnosis and management. Our findings recommend that the use of immunosuppression cocktails provided to patients should be closely monitored and continuously assessed to maintain the desirable effects of cytokines and chemokines needed to fight the SARS, MERS, and COVID-19. The current gap in evidence is the lack of large clinical trials to determine the optimal and effective dosage and timing for a therapeutic regimen.

Convalescent Plasma Transfusion for the Treatment of COVID-19 in Adults: A Global Perspective.

More than one year into the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, healthcare systems across the world continue to be overwhelmed with soaring daily cases. The treatment spectrum primarily includes ventilation support augmented with repurposed drugs and/or convalescent plasma transfusion (CPT) from recovered COVID-19 patients. Despite vaccine variants being recently developed and administered in several countries, challenges in global supply chain logistics limit their timely availability to the wider world population, particularly in developing countries. Given the measured success of conventional CPT in treating several infections over the past decade, recent studies have reported its effectiveness in decreasing the duration and severity of COVID-19 symptoms. In this review, we conduct a literature search of published studies investigating the use of CPT to treat COVID-19 patients from January 2020 to January 2021. The literature search identified 181 records of which 39 were included in this review. A random-effects model was used to aggregate data across studies, and mortality rates of 17 vs. 32% were estimated for the CPT and control patient groups, respectively, with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.49. The findings indicate that CPT shows potential in reducing the severity and duration of COVID-19 symptoms. However, early intervention (preferably within 3 days), recruitment of donors, and plasma potency introduce major challenges for its scaled-up implementation. Given the low number of existing randomized clinical trials (RCTs, four with a total of 319 patients), unanticipated risks to CPT recipients are highlighted and discussed. Nevertheless, CPT remains a promising COVID-19 therapeutic option that merits internationally coordinated RCTs to achieve a scientific risk-benefit consensus.