ArticleBulletin of mathematical biology2025
A bibliometric study on mathematical oncology: interdisciplinarity, internationality, collaboration and trending topics.
Article in Bulletin of mathematical biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Oncology research in the kingdom of Bahrain: a four-decade bibliometric evolution.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- 75 Years of Mathematical Oncology.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Mathematical oncology is an interdisciplinary research field where the mathematical sciences meet cancer research. Being situated at the intersection of these two fields makes mathematical oncology highly dynamic, as practicing researchers are incentivised to quickly adapt to both technical and medical research advances. Determining the scope of mathematical oncology is therefore not straightforward; however, it is important for purposes related to funding allocation, education, scientific communication, and community organisation. To address this issue, we here conduct a bibliometric analysis of mathematical oncology. We compare our results to the broader field of mathematical biology, and position our findings within theoretical science-of-science frameworks. Based on article metadata and citation flows, our results provide evidence that mathematical oncology has undergone a significant evolution since the 1960s marked by increased interactions with other disciplines, geographical expansion, larger research teams, and greater diversity in studied topics. The latter finding contributes to the greater discussion on which models different research communities consider to be valuable in the era of big data and machine learning. Further, the results presented in this study quantitatively motivate that international collaboration networks should be supported to enable new countries to enter and remain in the field, and that mathematical oncology benefits both mathematics and the life sciences.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.