ORIGINAL RESEARCH article
Front. Urol.
Sec. Urologic Oncology
Volume 5 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fruro.2025.1574626
This article is part of the Research TopicDevelopment and Future of Personalized and Precision Medicine Approaches for Urologic CancersView all articles
Knowledge map of self-reported outcomes in patients with prostate cancer: a bibliometric analysis (2014-2023)
Provisionally accepted
- Tongji Hospital,Tongji Medical College,Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
To analyze the related literature of self-reported outcomes of prostate cancer patients using bibliometric methods, and explore the research status and development trend in this field.The literature related to self-reported outcomes of prostate cancer was searched in Web of Science core database. The literature on prostate cancer self-reported outcomes was visualized using VOSviewer, CiteSpace and R software packages.total of 1119 relevant literatures were retrieved. Annual output consistently exceeded 100 articles since 2018, peaking at 161 in 2022. The U.S. (47.2%) and U.K. (21.5%) contributed 68.7% of publications. The University of Michigan emerged as the most productive institution. Collaborative networks showed strong U.S.-European ties, while Asian engagement intensified post-2020.The journal International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics (n=69) published most papers, whereas Journal of Clinical Oncology (n=48, citations=1,412) was most influential. Dual-map analysis revealed frequent citations from molecular/biology journals to clinical medicine literature. Barocas D.A., Cooperberg M.R., Koyama T., and Chen R.C. ( 21publications each) were top producers. Ethan Basch (259 co-citations) was the most cited scholar. The EPIC scale development study (Wei et al., 2000) was the most co-cited reference. Key citation bursts included Taneja's long-term outcomes study (2013)(2014)(2015)(2016)(2017)(2018) and the CHHiP radiotherapy trial (2018)(2019)(2020)(2021). "Quality of life" (181 occurrences) dominated keyword analysis, followed by "radiation therapy" and "prostatectomy." Five thematic clusters emerged: radiotherapy with a blue cluster, prostatectomy with a green cluster, daily management with a red cluster, research methods with a yellow cluster and scale development with a purple cluster.Qualitative methods gained prominence after 2020, while exercise and radiotherapy remained sustained intervention focuses.The reported outcomes of patients with prostate cancer have continued to receive attention in the past 10 years. In this study, three recognized bibliometric software were used for the first time to analyze the related studies on the reported outcomes of patients with prostate cancer, so as to provide reference and direction for future research.
Keywords: prostate cancer, Patient Reported Outcomes, Bibliometrics, Citespace, VOSviewer, R package
Received: 11 Feb 2025; Accepted: 29 Jul 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Qin, Liu, Zeng, Xie and Yang. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Fan Yang, Tongji Hospital,Tongji Medical College,Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.