Scholarly Activity of Radiation Oncologists in High-Income Developing Countries: Saudi Arabia as an Example

Abstract

PURPOSE To examine the trends and quality metrics of publications by radiation oncologists in Saudi Arabia. METHODS PubMed was searched using names of all Saudi radiation oncologists to retrieve published articles between January 2010 and December 2019. International collaboration, journal impact factor and country of origin, and number of citations were collected. Each article was assessed for epidemiologic type and independently assigned a level of evidence (LOE) by two authors. The trend in publications was examined and compared in the first and second 5-year periods (2010-2014 and 2015-2019) using relevant parameters. RESULTS A total of 186 publications were found and included. The most common type of research was cohort studies followed by case reports and case series in 24%, 14%, and 13% of all publications, respectively. Dosimetry, clinical, and preclinical studies formed 7%, 8.6%, and 7.5% of the total publications, respectively. The LOE was I, II, III, IV, and not applicable in 8.6%, 22%, 25.8%, 29%, and 14.5% of the included publications, respectively. Comparing the first and second 5-year periods, there was an increase in international collaboration ( P < .001) in the second period. The number of citations ( P < .001) and journal impact factor ( P = .028) were lower in the second period. LOE and publications in international journals were not statistically different between the two periods. CONCLUSION Although radiation oncology research activity in Saudi Arabia has gained momentum in terms of volume and international collaboration over time, the LOE has not improved. This calls for a national effort to make the contribution to the literature a priority, allocate adequate resources, and apply appropriate measures to enhance research productivity and quality.

Radiation Therapy in Arab World

“…Radiation Oncology research activity in Saudi Arabia has gained momentum in terms of volume and international collaboration over the period from 2010 to 2019; however, the resulting level of evidence has not improved over time, which calls for an effort to contribute to the literature as a priority, allocate adequate resources, and apply appropriate measures to enhance research productivity and quality [3].…”