Skip to main content
Healthcare logoLink to Healthcare
. 2021 Aug 6;9(8):1008. doi: 10.3390/healthcare9081008

Psycho-Oncology: A Bibliometric Review of the 100 Most-Cited Articles

Susan Fox 1,*, Julie Lynch 1,2, Paul D’Alton 1,2, Alan Carr 1
Editor: Joaquim Carreras
PMCID: PMC8393329  PMID: 34442145

Abstract

(1) Background: A bibliometric review of psycho-oncology research is overdue. (2) Methods: The 100 most-cited journal articles were compiled and ranked according to Scopus. (3) Results: The total citation count for the results ranged from 488–8509 (Mean = 940.27; SD = 1015.69). A significant correlation was found between years since publication and number of citations (p = 0.039). The majority of research originated from the United States (66%). The vast majority of research publications were original articles (80%). Observational research study designs represented the majority of studies (37%). Mixed cancer population research studies represented the largest cancer research population (36%). Positive psychology topics represented the most prolific proportion of studies (30%). Findings were reported in line with PRISMA-ScR guidelines. (4) Conclusions: This analysis offers a comprehensive account of seminal journal articles in psycho-oncology, identifying landmark contributions and areas for future research developments within the field, namely highlighting a need for more RCT studies. This analysis serves as an educational tool for interdisciplinary researchers and clinicians to support compassionate cancer care.

Keywords: cancer, bibliometrics, psycho-oncology, multidisciplinary, oncology, review

1. Introduction

Psycho-oncology is a collaborative, cross-disciplinary subspecialty of oncology with domains in the psychological, social, behavioural, and ethical aspects of cancer in clinical care [1,2]. The discipline provides clinical and research material about issues clinically relevant to health professionals who provide psychosocial services to cancer patients, their families, and their caregivers [3]. The foundations of the field first came into existence in the 1970s [1], the evolution of which has previously been detailed by the founder of the field, Dr Jimmie Holland [1,3].

Overtime a large body of literature has been published comprising a wide range of relevant research and clinical themes. A previous review of this wealth of literature by Greer outlines the important need to “close the yawning gap between current knowledge and therapeutic skills on the one hand and actual clinical care of cancer patients on the other” [4]. As the discipline approaches fifty years since formal foundation, a bibliometric review of the literature is warranted to aid the synthesis and implementation of the evidence base.

Citation count is an important metric in understanding the significance of a research contribution to a research field [5,6,7]. Situational analyses which identify research that has exerted significant citation influence offers researchers and clinicians an introduction to seminal research publications. It can be argued that the most-cited publications of a research field theoretically contribute the most to the respective field [8,9,10,11]. Notably, the approach has proved useful in practice-driven research funding decision-making by offering objective and reliable bibliometric quantitative analysis of grant productivity [8,12]. Bibliometric analyses with the aid of bibliographic electronic databases offer a systematic overview of peer-reviewed research in a range of disciplines and research fields [13,14]. Neurosciences have widely adopted the methodology to identify seminal research and contributors [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]. The use of bibliometric methodologies is emerging in cancer care [12,23,24,25,26,27,28,29]. However, to date, no known research has identified the highest-cited articles in psycho-oncology. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify and describe the characteristics of seminal journal articles that have contributed to the development of the field of psycho-oncology. Given the extensive remit of the multidisciplinary field of psycho-oncology, a bibliometric review of the literature may prove a helpful introduction for researchers and clinicians working in cancer care.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

This article describes a citation analysis of journal articles in the field of psycho-oncology pertaining to the guidance of clinical practice and research. A review of the 100 most-cited papers is consistent with the methodological approach to bibliometric reviews in health research [13,14,16,17,30,31,32,33]. A review protocol was developed to support the study’s objectives, search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria and risk of bias assessment. No deviations from the protocol were made.

2.2. Search Strategy and Study Selection

Publications pertaining to “psychosocial oncology” or “psycho-oncology” and psychological processes relating to cancer were identified. The search strategy was informed by the keywords and terms constructed by key journals in the field [2].

A time limit of publications from 1970 to 2020 was imposed on the searches, as the field of psycho-oncology was formally founded in the mid-1970s [1]. Searches were limited to the English language due to resource limitations (see Supplementary Material for detailed search strategy). The list of the top 100 cited articles was compiled and ranked according to the outputs from the Scopus database search in March 2020. Scopus was selected as the primary database because it provides access to more journals (approximately 34,346 peer-reviewed journals) than other widely used electronic databases, such as Web of Science (approximately 24,748 peer-reviewed journals) [34]. Key to database selection, Scopus provides tools for citation overview, allowing for bibliometric ranking of credited citations. Furthermore, several key psychosocial-oncology journals are indexed within Scopus. Inclusion of one electronic database is standard practice in bibliometric analyses [14,16,17,30,31,33]. Results retrieved from Scopus were sorted using the sorting option “times cited—highest to lowest.” Scopus outputs were then exported to Covidence, an electronic primary screening and data extraction tool, which has been recommended as best practice in rigorous review methodology data charting [35,36,37]. Duplicates were removed. Two reviewers (S.F. and J.L.) independently applied the inclusion and exclusion criteria to screen each title and abstract using the Covidence platform. Disagreements between the two reviewers were resolved through a further detailed review of the article(s) in question, and discussion until consensus was reached. An equivalent process of review was conducted for the full-text screening phase. Cohen’s κ indicated almost perfect interrater reliability (κ = 0.97, 98.87% of agreement).

2.3. Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility criteria were bound to the remit outlined in key definitions of psycho-oncology [1,2,38]. Journal articles were eligible for inclusion if their major focus addressed the psychological, social, behavioural, ethical, and systemic dimensions of cancer (including stable and modifiable confounding and interacting factors); specifically, the psychological responses of patients to cancer at all stages of the disease, and that of their families and caregivers including their health professionals; and the factors that may influence the disease process [1]. Given the intrinsic multidisciplinary nature of psycho-oncology, journal articles from a range of disciplines were eligible for inclusion, where the primary focus explored subjects within the defined remit of psycho-oncology. Eligibility criteria were extended to counselling, education, epidemiology, health advocacy, neurology, nursing, nutrition, palliative care, physical therapy, psychiatry, psychology, public health, social work, sociology, and oncology specialities [2]. Journal articles published in the English language were eligible for inclusion. No restrictions were placed on the type of research model, article type (e.g., research article, review, conference proceedings, editorial, letter, etc.).

Studies were ineligible for inclusion if they were the following:

  1. Journal articles with primarily medical foci despite the inclusion of brief quality of life measures;

  2. Journal articles which described mixed patient populations beyond oncology; or

  3. Did not have psycho-oncology research or practice as key foci.

2.4. Data Extraction

Data were extracted independently by the two reviewers. Information was extracted on the following variables: (1) title; (2) authorship and publication year; (3) country of publication and first author’s affiliation at the time of publication; (4) journal; (5) article type (e.g., intervention, systematic review); (6) article global subject (e.g., cancer prevention, psychoneuroimmunology or post-traumatic growth); (7) number of citations; (8) and citation rank. High percentage agreement between raters was found (percentage agreement = 94%).

2.5. Self-Citations

Using the “exclude self-citations” tool in Scopus, the percentage of self-citations within the list of 100 most highly cited articles derived from Scopus was calculated.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was calculated to determine whether the number of years since publication was correlated with total number of citations among the included articles.

2.7. Publication Trends

Additional searches using the terms “psycho-oncology” and “psychosocial oncology” were conducted within Scopus. These searches and the resulting data provide a broad overview of the publication trends of articles using these terms.

3. Results

3.1. Study Selection

A PRISMA flow diagram for the Scopus results is provided in Figure 1. The initial search returned 197,569 results, of which the titles and abstracts of the 2000 highest-cited articles were screened using the eligibility criteria. Full-text screening was completed for 351 articles. Results were ranked according to citation counts to represent the 100 most-cited articles. A table of the included 100 publications and a citation details are presented in the Appendix A.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

The PRISMA flowchart of study selection.

3.2. Self-Citations

Self-citations were found to represent 4.4 per cent of total citations retrieved from Scopus.

3.3. Study Characteristics

The characteristics of the articles retrieved are provided in Table 1. Of the 100 included papers, the highest-cited articles were published between 1992 and 2005. A significant correlation was found between years since publication and the number of citations (p = 0.039). The citation range was 488–8509 (mean = 940.27, SD = 1015.69). Similarly to recent bibliometric reviews [22,39] a word cloud of the words contained in the titles of the 100 included studies was generated using wordle.net in order to depict influential prevailing words and themes within the field of psycho-oncology. Popular words and phrases are highlighted based on frequency and relevance to the titles of the 100 included papers (see Figure 2).

Table 1.

Study characteristics of the top 100 published articles.

Study Characteristics Frequency Citations
(%) Mean ± SD Range
1. Country of Origin
United States 66 966.83 ± 806.81 491–4667
United Kingdom 12 635 ± 87.44 518–801
Canada 10 667 ± 132.54 512–909
The Netherlands 4 2615.75 ± 3954.77 541–8547
Germany 2 768.5 ± 102.53 696–841
Sweden 2 627.5 ± 75.66 574–681
Australia 1 - 1159
Austria 1 - 605
Brazil 1 - 723
Denmark 1 - 532
2. Publication Type
Article 80 925.23 ± 992.84 486–8451
Review paper 18 1044.5 ± 1184.88 500–4565
Conference paper 2 600 ± 97.58 531–669
3. Study Type
Tool development/evaluation 21 1347.10 ± 1811.02 505–8451
Observational (cross-sectional) 20 782.05 ± 287.63 500–1369
Observational (prospective cohort) 17 716.35 ± 303.22 488–1549
Review (non-systematic) 12 1045.75 ± 1168.71 486–4565
Intervention (RCT) 11 906 ± 970.03 486–3824
Intervention (non-RCT) 10 903.5 ± 407.36 511–1782
Review (systematic/meta-analysis) 9 619.89 ± 96.27 507–767
4. Global Subject Topic
Psychological well-being 14 758.93 ± 371.98 488–1862
Quality of life 14 1556 ± 2142.43 555–8451
Psychological distress/Mental health 12 892.33 ± 446.91 517–1782
Patient–physician communication 10 764.70 ± 287.31 507–1480
Symptom prevalence 10 672.80 ± 181.95 505–1079
Health promotion/Cancer prevention 6 754.83 ± 218.82 486–1153
Palliative/Supportive care 6 1193.50 ± 1295.41 511–3824
Psychoneuroimmunology 6 570.83 ± 79.56 504–715
Pain 5 1220.40 ± 944.66 583–2885
Patient treatment choices 4 573.75 ± 73.89 500–656
Mindfulness 2 2615 ± 2757.72 665–4565
Psychological and physical health outcomes 2 627.50 ± 77.01 573–682
Survivorship 2 696.50 ± 221.32 540–853
Family/system outcomes 1 - 566
5. Cancer Type
Mixed cancer population 36 907.33 ± 832.36 486–4565
Breast 25 757.08 ± 369.68 488–1862
Advanced/terminal 15 768.92 ± 284.83 511–1480
Undefined 13 890.15 ± 621.50 507–2885
Prostate 5 916.2 ± 385.48 571–1549
Lung 2 6137.5 ± 3271.78 3824–8451
Malignant melanoma 2 682 ± 241.83 511–853
Brain 1 - 569
Cervical 1 - 580
Gastric 1 - 680
Laryngeal 1 - 500
Colorectal 1 603
6. Population
Adult 97 944.14 ± 1021.61 486–8451
Child 3 653.33 ± 133.13 573–807

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Word cloud of the words used in the titles of the 100 included studies.

3.4. The 100 Most-Cited Articles

The distribution of results for the 100 most-cited articles is presented in Table 1. A comprehensive list of results is presented in the Appendix A.

3.5. Country of Publication

The country of origin of the first author for each article represented study origin data. Overall, 10 nations contributed to included study origin. The United States of America represented the largest contribution of studies (66%), followed respectively by the United Kingdom (12%) and Canada (10%). See all contributory countries in Table 1, panel 1.

3.6. Publication Type

The distribution of document type is presented in panel 2. Original articles represented 80% of the studies. Review papers and conference papers represented 18% and 2% of studies respectively.

3.7. Type of Study

Observational research study designs represented the majority of studies (37%). Cross-sectional observational designs represented the largest cohort of studies (20%) followed closely by prospective designs (17%). Tool development/evaluation, intervention and review studies each represented 21% of studies. Comprehensive distribution of study methodology is presented in panel 3.

3.8. Global Subject Topic

Positive psychology represented the largest proportion of included studies (30%), where the overarching global subject topic of studies examined psychological well-being and post-traumatic growth (14%), quality of life (14%), and mindfulness (2%). Clinical psychology global topics represented the second-largest cohort of studies (12%), where topics included psychological distress and mental health outcome including depression and suicidality were explored. Parallel psychological and physical health outcomes were the global subject topic for 2% of studies. Symptom prevalence represented 15% of study global subject topics, where 5% of studies examined pain prevalence and 10% explored additional cancer-related sequelae including the prevalence of cancer-related fatigue. Health promotion studies represented 6% of studies. These studies explored cancer prevention including self-monitoring behaviour, genomic testing, and survivorship intervention studies. Patient–physician communication and patient communication needs represented 10% of studies. Patient treatment choices including complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) represented 4% of studies. Palliative or supportive care studies represented 6%. Psychoneuroimmunology research represented 6% of the studies. Survivorship analyses represented 6% of the studies. Family system outcomes represented 1% of studies. See panel 4 for comprehensive results.

3.9. Cancer Population

The largest proportion of studies explored mixed cancer populations (36%) followed by breast cancer populations (25%), and advanced/terminal cancer populations (15%). A significant proportion of studies did not define the cancer population (13%). A further 5% of studies included prostate cancer patients. Lung and malignant melanoma patients each represented 2% of studies. Brain, cervical, gastric, laryngeal, and colorectal cancer populations each represented 1% of studies. See panel 5 for comprehensive results. The vast majority of the included studies examined adult populations (97%). The remaining 3% of the studies examined child populations.

3.10. Major Contributing Journals and Periods

The 100 most-cited articles were published in 46 journals; 17 journals represented more than one study. The major contributing journals are presented in Table 2. The journals that contributed six or more of the 100 most-cited studies included the Journal of the American Medical Association, The New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, The British Medical Journal, Health Psychology and the Journal of Clinical Oncology. The journal that published the 100 most-cited psycho-oncology studies with the highest citation count was The Lancet.

Table 2.

Journals that have published the highest-cited articles as listed in Scopus.

Journal Frequency (%) Sum
(No. Citations)
Mean ± SD
(No. Citations)
Range
(No. Citations)
Journal of the American Medical Association 15 12,823 854.87 ± 303.16 507–1480
New England Journal of Medicine 8 9213 1151.63 ± 1130.83 500–3824
Lancet 7 13,158 1879.71 ± 2932.52 511–8451
British Medical Journal 6 3773 628.83 ± 54.09 597–738
Health Psychology 6 3591 598.5 ± 85.11 500–695
Journal of Clinical Oncology 6 7056 1176 ± 1219.80 540–3655
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 4 7038 1759.5 ± 1891.73 605–4565
Archives of General Psychiatry 3 2062 687.33 ± 171.25 511–853
Pain 3 2458 819.33 ± 227.14 583–1036
Annals of Oncology 2 1336 668 ± 16.97 656–680
Archives of Internal Medicine 2 1088 544 ± 26.87 525–563
Canadian Medical Association Journal 2 1247 623.5 ± 81.32 566–681
Cancer 2 1055 527.5 ± 28.99 507–548
Journal of Pain and Symptom Management 2 1616 808 ± 383.25 537–1079
Lancet Oncology 2 1284 642 ± 103.24 569–715
Psycho-Oncology 2 2166 1083 ± 746.70 555–1611
Seminars in Haematology 2 1200 600 ± 97.58 531–669
CA: Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2 1188 594 ± 152.74 486–702

The 100 most-cited studies were published from 1975 to 2016. Figure 3 presents the publication trends for the 100 included publications. A period of 24 years represented 79% of studies, where the majority of studies were published between 1981–2005. A peak in publications was observed in the year 2000.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Publication trends for the 100 included publications.

Figure 4 provides an overview of publication trends within Scopus under the key terms “psycho oncology” and “psychosocial oncology”. Publications under the term “psychosocial oncology” precede “psycho oncology” publications commencing in 1973. The term “psycho oncology” presents initially in 1979, demonstrating the evolution of the discipline. A peak in publications was observed in 2018 for both search terms.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Publications by year for the terms “psychosocial oncology” and “psycho-oncology” in Scopus.

3.11. The 10 Most-Cited Articles

The ten most-cited studies are presented in Table 3. The articles included the following: three studies detailing the development and assessment of psychometric measures, two quality of life measures [40,41] and one pain measure [42]; two reviews, the first explores psychological adjustment to breast cancer diagnosis [43], and the latter explores the role of mindfulness in psychological well-being and includes a prospective mindfulness-based intervention for early-stage cancer patients [44]; one cross-sectional observational study which compares psychological distress prevalence by cancer site [45] two controlled trial studies, one randomised controlled trial exploring an early palliative care intervention for metastatic lung cancer patients [46]; and one prospective controlled trial exploring a psychosocial group-based intervention for metastatic breast cancer patients [47]; and finally two prospective cohort studies, one identifying the determinants of quality of life and satisfaction among prostate cancer survivors [48]; and one determining the impact of end-of-life patient–physician communication on patient mental health, medical care near death, and caregiver bereavement adjustment in advanced cancer patients and their family systems [49].

Table 3.

The 10 highest-cited publications in psycho-oncology.

Rank Author and Year Citations Description
1 Aaronson et al. 1993 8451 An assessment of the EORTC QLQ-C30 quality of life psychometric tool.
2 Brown and Ryan 2003 4565 An overview of the role of mindfulness in psychological well-being and a prospective mindfulness-based intervention for early-stage cancer patients.
3 Temel et al. 2010 3824 An RCT where newly diagnosed patients with metastatic lung cancer were randomised to receive either early palliative care integrated with standard oncologic care/standard oncologic care.
4 Cella et al. 1993 3655 The development and assessment of the FACT quality of life psychometric tool.
5 Cleeland and Ryan 1994 2885 The development of the BPI pain psychometric tool.
6 Taylor 1983 1862 A review of psychological adjustment to breast cancer diagnosis.
7 Spiegel et al. 1989 1782 A prospective controlled trial where patients with metastatic breast cancer were randomised to psychosocial group-based intervention and standard oncologic care/standard oncologic care.
8 Zabora et al. 2001 1611 A cross-sectional observational study of psychological distress prevalence and comparison by cancer site.
9 Sanda et al. 2008 1549 A prospective cohort study identifying determinants of quality of life and satisfaction among prostate cancer survivors.
10 Wright et al. 2008 1480 A longitudinal prospective cohort study of patients with advanced cancer and families to determine the impact of end-of-life patient–physician communication on patient/family outcomes.

3.12. Major Contributing Authors

Overall, a total of 158 authors contributed to the results. There was wide, disparate authorship for first authors where 91 first authors represented the 100 included studies. Of these included studies, only one first author had published three studies as first author [47,50,51]. Three other first authors each published two studies as first author [40,52,53,54,55,56]. Each of these authors contributed as co-authors to other studies indicating a psycho-oncological focus in their published work. Cella, D. contributed the largest number of studies to the research (n = 7) [40,52,57,58,59,60,61]. Table 4 presents results for authors who contributed three or more of the 100 most-cited psycho-oncology articles.

Table 4.

Authors who contributed three or more of the 100 most-cited psycho-oncology articles.

Author Total Articles
(n)
Role of Author in Total
Articles
Citation Count
±
SD
First and Corresponding Author Co-Author
Cella, D. 7 2 5 1162.29 ± 1115.27
Courneya, K.S. 5 0 5 635.2 ± 117.53
Breitbart, W. 4 1 3 664.5 ± 115.30
Litwin, M.S. 4 2 2 1002.5 ± 385.32
Portenoy, R.K. 4 2 2 761.75 ± 183.05
Demark-Wahnefried, W. 3 1 2 642.67 ± 137.00
Ganz, P.A. 3 0 3 740.67 ± 102.26
Greer, S. 3 1 2 534 ± 20.66
Sloan, J.A. 3 0 3 747.67 ± 173.62
Spiegel, D. 3 3 0 994.67 ± 688.72

4. Discussion

The aim of this review was to perform a bibliometric analysis of the 100 most-cited journal articles in psycho-oncology. It is, to the best of our knowledge, the first study to identify and describe the characteristics of highly cited journal articles and publication trends that have contributed to the development of the field.

The results of the bibliometric review provide a systematic overview of seminal research in psycho-oncology overtime. Our review presents a body of evidence which may have multiple applications for researchers and clinicians alike working in the field of psycho-oncology, including potential for the development of educational materials, journal editorial strategy, and future research.

In accordance with Scopus, our analysis revealed that the 100 most-cited articles were published between 1975 and 2016. This finding is in keeping with the timeline of previous reviews which describe the evolution of the discipline, from a time when a diagnosis of cancer was stigmatised and not openly disclosed to patients, and towards a time of more trauma-informed cancer care [1,2,38]. The 100 most-cited journal articles were all published by 2016 and the ten most-cited articles averaged 21.8 years since publication, indicating that the research exists along a developmental trajectory whereby time impacts on citation count and subsequent influence. The majority of research originated from the United States (66%). The vast majority of research publications were original articles (80%). Observational research study designs represented the majority of studies (37%). Mixed cancer population research studies represented the largest cancer research population (36%).

Our analysis revealed that positive psychology topics and clinical psychosocial-oncology topics represented the most prolific proportion of included studies. This finding reflects one of the most fundamental questions that psycho-oncology seeks to understand—how do people with cancer feel? The global subject topics included in our analysis reflect the targets of previous narrative reviews of psycho-oncology [38]. Other subject topics included in our review explored parallel psychological and physical health outcomes, symptom prevalence including pain and cancer-related fatigue, health promotion and cancer prevention research including self-monitoring behaviour, genomic testing and survivorship intervention studies, patient–physician communication and patient communication needs, patient treatment choices including complementary and alternative medicine, palliative care research, psychoneuroimmunology, survivorship, and family system outcomes. Our analysis highlights the psychosocial transitory nature of cancer, which presents the potential for both positive and negative outcomes [62]. Findings reflect increased recognition for the “people part” of cancer care and the sixth vital sign in medicine—distress [63]. Enhanced patient participation and increased patient–physician communication in treatment decisions have been described in recent reviews of the field [3]. Beyond this, the analysis emphasises the impact of psychosocial factors in physical health and the growing attention that psychoneuroimmunology research has gained [64]. A paucity of highly cited research on adherance to cancer treatment was identified. Given the value of research on this subject topic for MDTs, this factor represents a deficit among included study topics.

Journal and author contributions were widely heterogeneous in nature. Our analyses revealed 91 first authors contributors across the 100 included studies. Notably, self-citations represented a very small percentage of citations (4.4%). A previous review of self-citations in research indicated that self-citations typically account for an average 10–20% of citation counts [65]. The 100 included articles were published in 46 journals, where 17 journals represented more than one study. Included studies were published in high-impact factor journals. Our analysis of highly cited journal articles reflects the interdisciplinary nature of psychosocial-oncology, which demonstrated the interfacing and overlapping boundaries with general medicine, oncology, psychiatry, pain medicine, health, and social psychology [2]. In keeping with this finding, interdisciplinary researcher and Chair of the Interdisciplinary Department of Medical Social Sciences at Northwestern University, Prof. David Cella, was the most prolific author) [40,52,57,58,59,60,61]. Additional analysis of global publication trends within Scopus indicated that the term “psychosocial oncology” precedes “psycho-oncology”. Although the percentage of publication increased over time, a noticeable peak in publications was observed in 2018 for both search terms, clearly demonstrating the dynamic evolution of the discipline. In addition to time, other secular trends such as increased capacity of search engines and access to research articles online positively impact citation count.

4.1. Strengths and Limitations

Beyond its novel contribution, this bibliometric analysis was strengthened by the use of two search methods. The keyword search enabled the identification of publication trends for psychosocial oncology in addition to psycho-oncology. This methodological consideration enriches the tapestry of the findings as psychosocial oncology terminology precedes psycho-oncology in the evolution of the field [1]. Additionally, the review was strengthened by its adherence to bibliometric technical methods [66,67]. A further strength of this study is the assessment of the prevalence of self-citations. Inclusion of this analyses explores academic biases which can artificially inflate citation impact rate by objectively assessing the impact of ‘other-driven’ citations [5,68]. Inversely, this bibliometric review is not without its own limitations. Specifically, a publication bias may have been induced by the methodological limitation to only include English language publications. This limitation may explain why the study origins of the leading contributing counties were Anglophonic countries, namely the USA, UK, and Canada, because seminal articles in other languages were not included.

Though comprehensive, our analysis was limited in that research influence was operationalised using a citation-driven approach. Indeed each metric has its own limitations that need to be considered when selecting an appropriate metric for evaluation. Given the advantages and disadvantages of citation counts, our analysis should be interpreted with caution [5,68]. In academia, it is a common misconception that citation counts provide a benchmark for the impact of research. It should be noted that citation-driven bibliometric analyses neglect to consider the influence of landmark conceptual research journal articles. Further, our analysis does not assess the quality of the research presented. Quality appraisal of the findings was not possible, given the heterogeneity of the resulting output. It is important to consider that citation count fails to represent the quality of the research. Our analysis cannot identify with any authority the key conceptual journal articles that have shaped the trajectory and development of the field. This shortcoming serves as a rationale to support the investigation of conceptually-driven influential psychosocial-oncology research in future. However, it can be noted that previous review articles have reflected on key conceptual developments [1,3]. Finally, the search was limited to the Scopus electronic database. While the inclusion of one electronic database is standard practice in bibliometric analyses [14,16,17,30,31,33], it is important to critique any outcome metric provider. Key to database selection, Scopus provides tools for citation overview including self-citation analysis. However, highly cited articles in journals not indexed in Scopus may not have been captured in the findings. Further, citation count varies between databases [5,68]. For this reason, the ranking of included articles should be interpreted with caution.

4.2. Implications for Psycho-Oncology Practice and Research

Given the extensive remit of the multidisciplinary field of oncology, a bibliometric review of the psycho-oncology literature may prove a helpful introduction for multidisciplinary teams working in cancer care. This review offers a broad overview of seminal research in the field. It also honours the key contributors to the field by identifying work that has been frequently cited by other researchers. Clinicians new to the field may perceive psycho-oncology to solely encompass the psychological health of oncology patients. It is important to educate new clinicians to routinely and sensitively consider the individual and systemic level psychological, social, behavioural, and ethical aspects of cancer, since they can substantially influence the outcome of treatment. This review provides health professions with an educational resource that compounds our understanding of the mind–body interaction that continues to challenge a mechanical model of cancer.

This study generates knowledge regarding the intricacies of psycho-oncology clinical practice and research work and emphasises the need for compassionate collaborative, cross-disciplinary cancer care. It is important to acknowledge the need for translation beyond citation into interdisciplinary practice.

4.3. Future Directions

This bibliometric review provides a situational analysis of the field of psycho-oncology in the present, as opposed to a view of the future of the field. As discussed previously, it is important to note that our analyses offers a snapshot of highly cited seminal research in psycho-oncology at one point in time. Our analysis is best viewed as a live document responding to the evolving priorities of the field. We recommend replication studies at regular intervals to update the findings in order to maximise educational value. The nature of our review offers a broad scope of the field; future research could consider a more introspective bibliometric analysis of Psycho-Oncology exclusively [69]. Bibliometric reviews of single journals help chart the developmental growth and trajectory of a journal by identifying research trends, areas of research neglect, and disparities in academic publishing. Findings may offer editorial boards insight to help close gaps in research and help support funded external research grant calls [69].

Such an approach would offer increased insight and further support the maturity of the discipline, educational materials, and journal editorial strategy.

Relatively few high-quality RCT studies were included. This deficit identified in our analysis generates greater understanding of one of the pervading gaps in the research field. Our analysis underscores the critical need to enhance the science of psycho-oncology. Greater emphasis on high-quality methodological research is needed. This finding serves as a specific area of research opportunity to greater align future research to the needs of the field.

5. Conclusions

Psycho-oncology is a vast subspecialty of oncology encompassing diverse areas of clinical practice and research, focusing on the humanism in cancer-prevention, treatment, and aftercare. Given the evolution of the field from a place where the word ‘cancer’ was stigmatised and the feelings of cancer patients were not acknowledged, a bibliometric review which reflects on almost fifty years since the formal foundation of the field is overdue. This bibliometric review identifies the most frequently cited psycho-oncology journal articles published across all journals listed in Scopus. The results identified in this study are landmark papers that have contributed greatly to the field. This review denotes the growing nature of the discipline, which continues to advance. As the discipline has become increasingly established, there has been a simultaneous increase in research publications. While this study is not without its limitations, it is hoped that identification of seminal research publications will help inform future research contributions. This analysis should serve to support the routine consideration of the psychosocial aspects of cancer care. It may provide a useful educational tool for interdisciplinary clinicians. It is hoped that it will encourage considered compassionate care for cancer patients.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/healthcare9081008/s1: Supplementary Material 1. Scopus String Search, Supplementary Material 2. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) Checklist.

Appendix A

Table A1.

Comprehensive results from Scopus for the 100 most cited journal articles.

Rank Authors Title Year Journal
1 Aaronson N.K., et al. [41] The European Organization For Research And Treatment Of Cancer QLQ-C30: A Quality-Of-Life Instrument For Use In International Clinical Trials In Oncology 1993 Journal of the National Cancer Institute
2 Brown K.W., & Ryan R.M. [44] The Benefits Of Being Present: Mindfulness And Its Role In Psychological Well-Being 2003 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
3 Temel J.S., et al. [46] Early Palliative Care For Patients With Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer 2010 New England Journal of Medicine
4 Cella D.F., et al. [40] The Functional Assessment Of Cancer Therapy Scale: Development And Validation Of The General Measure 1993 Journal of Clinical Oncology
5 Cleeland C.S., et al. [42] Pain Assessment: Global Use Of The Brief Pain Inventory. 1994 Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore
6 Taylor S.E. [43] Adjustment To Threatening Events: A Theory Of Cognitive Adaptation 1983 American Psychologist
7 Spiegel D., et al. [47] Effect Of Psychosocial Treatment On Survival Of Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer 1989 The Lancet
8 Zabora J., et al. [45] The Prevalence Of Psychological Distress By Cancer Site 2001 Psycho-Oncology
9 Sanda M.G., et al. [48] Quality Of Life And Satisfaction With Outcome Among Prostate-Cancer Survivors 2008 New England Journal of Medicine
10 Wright A.A., et al. [49] Associations Between End-Of-Life Discussions, Patient Mental Health, Medical Care Near Death, And Caregiver Bereavement Adjustment 2008 Journal of the American Medical Association
11 Derogatis L.R., et al. [70] The Prevalence Of Psychiatric Disorders Among Cancer Patients 1983 Journal of the American Medical Association
12 Carver C.S., et al. [71] How Coping Mediates The Effect Of Optimism On Distress: A Study Of Women With Early Stage Breast Cancer 1993 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
13 Spitzer W.O., et al. [72] Measuring The Quality Of Life Of Cancer Patients. A Concise QL-Index For Use By Physicians 1981 Journal of Chronic Diseases
14 Holmes M.D., et al. [73] Physical Activity And Survival After Breast Cancer Diagnosis 2005 Journal of the American Medical Association
15 Murthy V.H., et al. [74] Participation In Cancer Clinical Trials: Race-, Sex-, And Age-Based Disparities 2004 Journal of the American Medical Association
16 Yellen S.B., et al. [61] Measuring Fatigue And Other Anemia-Related Symptoms With The Functional Assessment Of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Measurement System 1997 Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
17 Serlin R.C., et al. [75] When Is Cancer Pain Mild, Moderate Or Severe? Grading Pain Severity By Its Interference With Function 1995 Pain
18 Portenoy R.K., et al. [55] The Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale: An Instrument For The Evaluation Of Symptom Prevalence, Characteristics And Distress 1994 European Journal of Cancer
19 Wei J.T., et al. [76] Development And Validation Of The Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) For Comprehensive Assessment Of Health-Related Quality Of Life In Men With Prostate Cancer 2000 Urology
20 Cassileth B.R., et al. [77] Information And Participation Preferences Among Cancer Patients 1980 Annals of Internal Medicine
21 Degner L.F., et al. [78] Information Needs And Decisional Preferences In Women With Breast Cancer 1997 Journal of the American Medical Association
22 Bakitas M., et al. [79] Effects Of A Palliative Care Intervention On Clinical Outcomes In Patients With Advanced Cancer: The Project ENABLE II Randomized Controlled Trial 2009 Journal of the American Medical Association
23 Peterman A.H., et al. [59] Measuring Spiritual Well-Being In People With Cancer: The Functional Assessment Of Chronic Illness Therapy - Spiritual Well-Being Scale (FACIT-Sp) 2002 Annals of Behavioral Medicine
24 Litwin M.S., et al. [53] Quality-Of-Life Outcomes In Men Treated For Localized Prostate Cancer 1995 Journal of the American Medical Association
25 Fawzy F.I., et al. [80] Malignant Melanoma: Effects Of An Early Structured Psychiatric Intervention, Coping, And Affective State On Recurrence And Survival 6 Years Later 1993 Archives of General Psychiatry
26 Schipper H., et al. [81] Measuring The Quality Of Life Of Cancer Patients: The Functional Living Index-Cancer: Development And Validation 1984 Journal of Clinical Oncology
27 Zech D.F., et al. [82] Validation Of World Health Organization Guidelines For Cancer Pain Relief: A 10-Year Prospective Study 1995 Pain
28 Wolfe J., et al. [83] Symptoms And Suffering At The End Of Life In Children With Cancer 2000 New England Journal of Medicine
29 Shacham, S. [84] A Shortened Version Of The Profile Of Mood States 1983 Journal of Personality Assessment
30 Curt G.A., et al. [58] Impact Of Cancer-Related Fatigue On The Lives Of Patients: New Findings From The Fatigue Coalition 2000 Oncologist
31 Degner L.F., & Sloan J.A. [85] Decision Making During Serious Illness: What Role Do Patients Really Want To Play? 1992 Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
32 Speck R.M., et al. [86] An Update Of Controlled Physical Activity Trials In Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis 2010 Journal of Cancer Survivorship
33 Foley K.M. [87] The Treatment Of Cancer Pain 1985 New England Journal of Medicine
34 Demark-Wahnefried W., et al. [88] Riding The Crest Of The Teachable Moment: Promoting Long-Term Health After The Diagnosis Of Cancer 2005 Journal of Clinical Oncology
35 Burgess C., et al. [89] Depression And Anxiety In Women With Early Breast Cancer: Five Year Observational Cohort Study 2005 British Medical Journal
36 Calman K.C. [90] Quality Of Life In Cancer Patients—An Hypothesis. 1984 Journal of Medical Ethics
37 Bower J.E., et al. [91] Fatigue In Breast Cancer Survivors: Occurrence, Correlates, And Impact On Quality Of Life 2000 Journal of Clinical Oncology
38 Reiche E.M.V., et al. [92] Stress, Depression, The Immune System, And Cancer 2004 Lancet Oncology
39 Zimmermann C., et al. [93] Early Palliative Care For Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial 2014 The Lancet
40 Rock C.L., et al. [94] Nutrition And Physical Activity Guidelines For Cancer Survivors 2012 CA: Cancer Journal for Clinicians
41 Spiegel D., et al. [50] Group Support For Patients With Metastatic Cancer: A Randomized Prospective Outcome Study 1981 Archives of General Psychiatry
42 Meyer T.J., & Mark M.M. [95] Effects Of Psychosocial Interventions With Adult Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis Of Randomized Experiments 1995 Health Psychology
43 Breitbart W., et al. [96] Depression, Hopelessness, And Desire For Hastened Death In Terminally Ill Patients With Cancer 2000 Journal of the American Medical Association
44 Antoni M.H., et al. [97] Cognitive-Behavioral Stress Management Intervention Decreases The Prevalence Of Depression And Enhances Benefit Finding Among Women Under Treatment For Early-Stage Breast Cancer 2001 Health Psychology
45 Detmar S.B., et al. [98] Health-Related Quality-Of-Life Assessments And Patient-Physician Communication: A Randomized Controlled Trial 2002 Journal of the American Medical Association
46 De Haes M., et al. [99] Measuring Psychological And Physical Distress In Cancer Patients: Structure And Application Of The Rotterdam Symptom Checklist 1990 British Journal of Cancer
47 McNeely M.L., et al. [100] Effects Of Exercise On Breast Cancer Patients And Survivors: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis 2006 Canadian Medical Association Journal
48 Glimelius B., et al. [101] Randomized Comparison Between Chemotherapy Plus Best Supportive Care With Best Supportive Care In Advanced Gastric Cancer 1997 Annals of Oncology
49 Goodwin P.J., et al. [102] The Effect Of Group Psychosocial Support On Survival In Metastatic Breast Cancer 2001 New England Journal of Medicine
50 Lerman C., et al. [103] BRCA1 Testing In Families With Hereditary Breast-Ovarian Cancer: A Prospective Study Of Patient Decision Making And Outcomes 1996 Journal of the American Medical Association
51 Vogelzang N.J., et al. [60] Patient, Caregiver, And Oncologist Perceptions Of Cancer-Related Fatigue: Results Of A Tripart Assessment Survey 1997 Seminars in Hematology
52 Speca M., et al. [104] A Randomized, Wait-List Controlled Clinical Trial: The Effect Of A Mindfulness Meditation-Based Stress Reduction Program On Mood And Symptoms Of Stress In Cancer Outpatients 2000 Psychosomatic Medicine
53 Molassiotis A., et al. [105] Use Of Complementary And Alternative Medicine In Cancer Patients: A European Survey 2005 Annals of Oncology
54 Litwin M.S., et al. [54] The UCLA Prostate Cancer Index: Development, Reliability, And Validity Of A Health-Related Quality Of Life Measure 1998 Medical Care
55 Taylor S.E., et al. [106] Attributions, Beliefs About Control, And Adjustment To Breast Cancer 1984 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
56 Fallowfield L., et al. [107] Efficacy Of A Cancer Research UK Communication Skills Training Model For Oncologists: A Randomised Controlled Trial 2002 Lancet
57 Cordova M.J., et al. [62] Posttraumatic Growth Following Breast Cancer: A Controlled Comparison Study 2001 Health Psychology
58 Gomes B., & Higginson I.J. [108] Factors Influencing Death At Home In Terminally Ill Patients With Cancer: Systematic Review 2006 British Medical Journal
59 Slevin M.L., et al. [109] Attitudes To Chemotherapy: Comparing Views Of Patients With Cancer With Those Of Doctors, Nurses, And General Public 1990 British Medical Journal
60 Meyerowitz B.E., & Chaiken S. [110] The Effect Of Message Framing On Breast Self-Examination Attitudes, Intentions, And Behavior 1987 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
61 Scheithauer W., et al. [111] Randomised Comparison Of Combination Chemotherapy Plus Supportive Care With Supportive Care Alone In Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer 1993 British Medical Journal
62 Fallowfield L.J., et al. [112] Psychological Outcomes Of Different Treatment Policies In Women With Early Breast Cancer Outside A Clinical Trial 1990 British Medical Journal
63 Rutten L.J.F., et al. [113] Information Needs And Sources Of Information Among Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review Of Research (1980–2003) 2005 Patient Education and Counseling
64 Leydon G.M., et al. [114] Cancer Patients’ Information Needs And Information Seeking Behaviour: In Depth Interview Study 2000 British Medical Journal
65 McCorkle R., & Young K. [115] Development Of A Symptom Distress Scale. 1978 Cancer Nursing
66 Riley V. [116] Psychoneuroendocrine Influences On Immunocompetence And Neoplasia 1981 Science
67 Portenoy R.K., et al. [56] Breakthrough Pain: Characteristics And Impact In Patients With Cancer Pain 1999 Pain
68 Brewer N.T., & Fazekas K.I. [117] Predictors Of HPV Vaccine Acceptability: A Theory-Informed, Systematic Review 2007 Preventive Medicine
69 Kreuter M.W., et al. [118] Achieving Cultural Appropriateness In Health Promotion Programs: Targeted And Tailored Approaches 2003 Health Education and Behavior
70 Miller G.E., et al. [119] Chronic Psychological Stress And The Regulation Of Pro-Inflammatory Cytokines: A Glucocorticoid-Resistance Model 2002 Health Psychology
71 Hudson M.M., et al. [120] Health Status Of Adult Long-Term Survivors Of Childhood Cancer: A Report From The Childhood Cancer Survivor Study 2003 Journal of the American Medical Association
72 Steineck G., et al. [121] Quality Of Life After Radical Prostatectomy Or Watchful Waiting 2002 New England Journal of Medicine
73 Mulhern R.K., et al. [122] Late Neurocognitive Sequelae In Survivors Of Brain Tumours In Childhood 2004 Lancet Oncology
74 Grunfeld E., et al. [123] Family Caregiver Burden: Results Of A Longitudinal Study Of Breast Cancer Patients And Their Principal Caregivers 2004 Canadian Medical Association Journal
75 Ghezzi, P., et al. [124] Impact Of Follow-Up Testing On Survival And Health-Related Quality Of Life In Breast Cancer Patients: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial 1994 Journal of the American Medical Association
76 Zhang B., et al. [125] Health Care Costs In The Last Week Of Life Associations With End-Of-Life Conversations 2009 Archives of Internal Medicine
77 Basch E., et al. [126] Symptom Monitoring With Patient-Reported Outcomes During Routine Cancer Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial 2016 Journal of Clinical Oncology
78 Hann D., et al. [127] Measurement Of Depressive Symptoms In Cancer Patients: Evaluation Of The Center For Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) 1999 Journal of Psychosomatic Research
79 Greer S., et al. [128] Psychological Response To Breast Cancer: Effect On Outcome 1979 The Lancet
80 Brady M.J., et al. [57] A Case For Including Spirituality In Quality Of Life Measurement In Oncology 1999 Psycho-Oncology
81 Jacobsen P.B., et al. [129] Screening For Psychologic Distress In Ambulatory Cancer Patients: A Multicenter Evaluation Of The Distress Thermometer 2005 Cancer
82 Blanchard C.M., et al. [130] Cancer Survivors’ Adherence To Lifestyle Behavior Recommendations And Associations With Health-Related Quality Of Life: Results From The American Cancer Society’s SCS-II 2008 Journal of Clinical Oncology
83 Teunissen S., et al. [131] Symptom Prevalence In Patients With Incurable Cancer: A Systematic Review 2007 Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
84 Gøtzsche P.C., & Jørgensen K. [132] Screening For Breast Cancer With Mammography 2013 Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
85 Cella, D. [52] The Functional Assessment Of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An) Scale: A New Tool For The Assessment Of Outcomes In Cancer Anemia And Fatigue 1997 Seminars in Hematology
86 Watson M., et al. [133] Influence Of Psychological Response On Survival In Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Cohort Study 1999 Lancet
87 Lawlor P.G., et al. [134] Occurrence, Causes, And Outcome Of Delirium In Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Prospective Study 2002 Archives of Internal Medicine
88 Burstein H.J., et al. [135] Use Of Alternative Medicine By Women With Early-Stage Breast Cancer 1999 New England Journal of Medicine
89 Moorey S., et al. [136] The Factor Structure And Factor Stability Of The Hospital Anxiety And Depression Scale In Patients With Cancer 1991 British Journal of Psychiatry
90 McClain C.S., et al. [137] Effect Of Spiritual Well-Being On End-Of-Life Despair In Terminally-Ill Cancer Patients 2003 Lancet
91 Fawzy F.I., et al. [138] A Structured Psychiatric Intervention For Cancer Patients: I. Changes Over Time In Methods Of Coping And Affective Disturbance 1990 Archives of General Psychiatry
92 Satin J.R., et al. [139] Depression As A Predictor Of Disease Progression And Mortality In Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis 2009 Cancer
93 Novack D.H., et al. [140] Changes In Physicians’ Attitudes Toward Telling The Cancer Patient 1979 Journal of the American Medical Association
94 Sears S.R., et al. [141] The Yellow Brick Road And The Emerald City: Benefit Finding, Positive Reappraisal Coping, And Posttraumatic Growth In Women With Early-Stage Breast Cancer 2003 Health Psychology
95 Piper B.F., et al. [142] The Revised Piper Fatigue Scale: Psychometric Evaluation In Women With Breast Cancer. 1998 Oncology Nursing Forum
96 Spiegel D., & Giese-Davis J. [51] Depression And Cancer: Mechanisms And Disease Progression 2003 Biological Psychiatry
97 Helgeson V.S., & Cohen S. [143] Social Support And Adjustment To Cancer: Reconciling Descriptive, Correlational, And Intervention Research 1996 Health Psychology
98 McNeil B.J., et al. [144] Speech And Survival: Tradeoffs Between Quality And Quantity Of Life In Laryngeal Cancer 1981 New England Journal of Medicine
99 Stanton A.L., et al. [145] Emotionally Expressive Coping Predicts Psychological And Physical Adjustment To Breast Cancer 2000 Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
100 Doyle C., et al. [146] Nutrition And Physical Activity During And After Cancer Treatment: An American Cancer Society Guide For Informed Choices 2006 CA: Cancer Journal for Clinicians

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.F. and A.C.; methodology, S.F.; software, S.F.; validation, S.F., J.L., and P.D.; formal analysis, S.F. and A.C.; investigation, S.F.; resources, S.F.; data curation, S.F.; writing—original draft preparation, S.F.; writing—review and editing, S.F., J.L., P.D., A.C.; visualization, S.F.; supervision, A.C.; project administration, S.F.; funding acquisition, N/A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Footnotes

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.Holland J.C. History of Psycho-Oncology: Overcoming Attitudinal and Conceptual Barriers. Psychosom. Med. 2002;64:206–221. doi: 10.1097/00006842-200203000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Journal of Psychosocial Oncology, Journal of Psychosocial Oncology Aims & Scope. [(accessed on 1 July 2021)]; Available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?show=aimsScope&journalCode=wjpo20.
  • 3.Holland J.C. Psycho-Oncology: Overview, Obstacles and Opportunities. Psychooncology. 2018;27:1364–1376. doi: 10.1002/pon.4692. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Greer S. Psycho-oncology: Its Aims, Achievements and Future Tasks. Psycho-Oncology. 1994;3:87–101. doi: 10.1002/pon.2960030203. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Agarwal A., Durairajanayagam D., Tatagari S., Esteves S.C., Harlev A., Henkel R., Roychoudhury S., Homa S., Puchalt N.G., Ramasamy R., et al. Bibliometrics: Tracking Research Impact by Selecting the Appropriate Metrics. Asian J. Androl. 2016;18:296–309. doi: 10.4103/1008-682X.171582. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bornmann L., Marx W., Gasparyan A.Y., Kitas G.D. Diversity, Value and Limitations of the Journal Impact Factor and Alternative Metrics. Rheumatol. Int. 2012;32:1861–1867. doi: 10.1007/s00296-011-2276-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Kanter S.L. Understanding the Journal’s Impact. Acad. Med. 2009;84:1169–1170. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181b7ffa6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Lauer M.S., Danthi N.S., Kaltman J., Wu C. Predicting Productivity Returns on Investment: Thirty Years of Peer Review, Grant Funding, and Publication of Highly Cited Papers at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Circ. Res. 2015;117:239–243. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.115.306830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Pritchard A. Statistical Bibliography or Bibliometrics. J. Doc. 1969;25:348. [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Saracevic T., Perk L.J. Ascertaining Activities in a Subject Area through Bibliometric Analysis. Application to Library Literature. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 1973;24:120–134. doi: 10.1002/asi.4630240207. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Donohue J.C. A Bibliometric Analysis of Certain Information Science Literature. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 1972;23:313–317. doi: 10.1002/asi.4630230506. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Campbell D., Picard-Aitken M., Côté G., Caruso J., Valentim R., Edmonds S., Williams G.T., Macaluso B., Robitaille J.P., Bastien N., et al. Bibliometrics as a Performance Measurement Tool for Research Evaluation: The Case of Research Funded by the National Cancer Institute of Canada. Am. J. Eval. 2010;31:66–83. doi: 10.1177/1098214009354774. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Walsh C., Lydon S., Byrne D., Madden C., Fox S., O’Connor P. The 100 Most Cited Articles on Healthcare Simulation: A Bibliometric Review. Simul. Healthc. 2018;13:211–220. doi: 10.1097/SIH.0000000000000293. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Arul K., Mesfin A. The Top 100 Cited Papers in Health Care Disparities: A Bibliometric Analysis. J. Racial Ethn. Heal. Disparities. 2017;4:854–865. doi: 10.1007/s40615-016-0288-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Kim H.J., Yoon D.Y., Kim E.S., Lee K., Bae J.S., Lee J.H. The 100 most-cited articles in neuroimaging: A bibliometric analysis. NeuroImage. 2016;139:149–156. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.06.029. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Kim Y., Yoon D.Y., Kim J.E., Park K.M., Lee J.H., Song H.K., Bae J.S. Citation Classics in Stroke: The Top-100 Cited Articles on Hemorrhagic Stroke. Eur. Neurol. 2017;78:210–216. doi: 10.1159/000479626. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Yeung A.W.K., Goto T.K., Leung W.K. At the Leading Front of Neuroscience: A Bibliometric Study of the 100 Most-Cited Articles. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2017;11:363. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00363. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Yeung A.W.K., Goto T.K., Leung W.K. Readability of the 100 Most-Cited Neuroimaging Papers Assessed by Common Readability Formulae. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2018;12:308. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00308. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Yeung A.W.K. The 100 Most Cited Papers Concerning the Insular Cortex of the Brain: A Bibliometric Analysis. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2018;12:337. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00337. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Pan Y.T., Zhang Y.H., Gao X.P., Jia J., Gao J.P., Ma Z. Scientific Progress Regarding Neural Regeneration in the Web of Science a 10-Year Bibliometric Analysis. Neural Regen. Res. 2013;8:3449–3454. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-5374.2013.36.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Hoppen N.H.F., Vanz S.A.d.S. Neurosciences in Brazil: A Bibliometric Study of Main Characteristics, Collaboration and Citations. Scientometrics. 2016;109:121–141. doi: 10.1007/s11192-016-1919-0. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Dodier O. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Recovered Memory Controversy in the 21st Century. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 2019;33:571–584. doi: 10.1002/acp.3498. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Harrington S.E., Stout N.L., Hile E., Fisher M.I., Eden M., Marchese V., Pfalzer L.A. Cancer Rehabilitation Publications (2008-2018) with a Focus on Physical Function: A Scoping Review. Phys. Ther. 2020;100:363–415. doi: 10.1093/ptj/pzz184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Stout N.L., Alfano C.M., Belter C.W., Nitkin R., Cernich A., Siegel K.L., Chan L. A Bibliometric Analysis of the Landscape of Cancer Rehabilitation Research (1992–2016) J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 2018:815–824. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djy108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Wang X., Guo J., Gu D., Yang Y., Yang X., Zhu K. Tracking Knowledge Evolution, Hotspots and Future Directions of Emerging Technologies in Cancers Research: A Bibliometrics Review. J. Cancer. 2019;10:2643–2653. doi: 10.7150/jca.32739. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Wang K., Feng C., Li M., Pei Q., Li Y., Zhu H., Song X., Pei H., Tan F. A Bibliometric Analysis of 23,492 Publications on Rectal Cancer by Machine Learning: Basic Medical Research Is Needed. Therap. Adv. Gastroenterol. 2020;13:175628482093459. doi: 10.1177/1756284820934594. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Glynn R.W., Chin J.Z., Kerin M.J., Sweeney K.J. Representation of Cancer in the Medical Literature—A Bibliometric Analysis. PLoS ONE. 2010;5:e13902. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0013902. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Kamdem J.P., Duarte A.E., Ibrahim M., Lukong K.E., Barros L.M., Roeder T. Bibliometric Analysis of Personalized Humanized Mouse and Drosophila Models for Effective Combinational Therapy in Cancer Patients. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Mol. Basis Dis. 2020;1866:165880. doi: 10.1016/j.bbadis.2020.165880. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Montazeri A. Health-Related Quality of Life in Breast Cancer Patients: A Bibliographic Review of the Literature from 1974 to 2007. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2008;27:1–31. doi: 10.1186/1756-9966-27-32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Landreneau J.P., Weaver M., Delaney C.P., Aminian A., Dimick J.B., Lillemoe K.D., Schauer P.R. The 100 Most Cited Papers in the History of the American Surgical Association. Ann. Surg. 2020;271:663–670. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003633. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Müller M., Gloor B., Candinas D., Malinka T. The 100 Most-Cited Articles in Visceral Surgery: A Systematic Review. Dig. Surg. 2016;33:509–519. doi: 10.1159/000446930. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Shuaib W., Acevedo J.N., Khan M.S., Santiago L.J., Gaeta T.J. The Top 100 Cited Articles Published in Emergency Medicine Journals. Am. J. Emerg. Med. 2015;33:1066–1071. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2015.04.047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Nason G.J., Tareen F., Mortell A. The Top 100 Cited Articles in Urology: An Update. J. Can. Urol. Assoc. 2013;7 doi: 10.5489/cuaj.189. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Web of Science Web of Science Core Collection. [(accessed on 3 April 2020)]; Available online: https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/solutions/web-of-science-core-collection/
  • 35.Cochrane Community Covidence. [(accessed on 2 March 2020)]; Available online: https://community.cochrane.org/help/tools-and-software/covidence.
  • 36.Kellermeyer L., Harnke B., Knight S. Covidence and Rayyan. J. Med. Libr. Assoc. 2018;106:580. doi: 10.5195/JMLA.2018.513. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Macdonald M., Martin Misener R., Weeks L., Helwig M. Covidence vs Excel for the Title and Abstract Review Stage of a Systematic Review. Int. J. Evid. Based. Healthc. 2016;14:200–201. doi: 10.1097/01.XEB.0000511346.12446.f2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Lang-Rollin I., Berberich G. Psycho-Oncology. Dialogues Clin. Neurosci. 2018;20:13. doi: 10.31887/DCNS.2018.20.1/ilangrollin. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Plusquellec P., Denault V. The 1000 Most Cited Papers on Visible Nonverbal Behavior: A Bibliometric Analysis. J. Nonverbal Behav. 2018;42:347–377. doi: 10.1007/s10919-018-0280-9. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Cella D.F., Tulsky D.S., Gray G., Sarafian B., Linn E., Bonomi A., Silberman M., Yellen S.B., Winicour P., Brannon J., et al. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Scale: Development and Validation of the General Measure. J. Clin. Oncol. 1993;11:570–579. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1993.11.3.570. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Aaronson N.K., Ahmedzai S., Bergman B., Bullinger M., Cull A., Duez N.J., Filiberti A., Flechtner H., Fleishman S.B., Haes J.C., et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: A Quality-of-Life Instrument for Use in International Clinical Trials in Oncology. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 1993;85:365–376. doi: 10.1093/jnci/85.5.365. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Cleeland C.S., Ryan K.M. Pain Assessment: Global Use of the Brief Pain Inventory. Ann. Acad. Med. Singapore. 1994;23:129–138. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Taylor S.E. Adjustment to Threatening Events: A Theory of Cognitive Adaptation. Am. Psychol. 1983;38:1161–1173. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.38.11.1161. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Brown K.W., Ryan R.M. The Benefits of Being Present: Mindfulness and Its Role in Psychological Well-Being. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2003;84:822–848. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Zabora J., Brintzenhofeszoc K., Curbow B., Hooker C., Piantadosi S. The Prevalence of Psychological Distress by Cancer Site. Psychooncology. 2001;10:19–28. doi: 10.1002/1099-1611(200101/02)10:1<19::AID-PON501>3.0.CO;2-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Temel J.S., Greer J.A., Muzikansky A., Gallagher E.R., Admane S., Jackson V.A., Dahlin C.M., Blinderman C.D., Jacobsen J., Pirl W.F., et al. Early Palliative Care for Patients with Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2010;363:733–742. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1000678. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Spiegel D., Kraemer H.C., Bloom J.R., Gottheil E. Effect of Psychosocial Treatment on Survival of Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer. Lancet. 1989;334:888–891. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(89)91551-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Sanda M.G., Dunn R.L., Michalski J., Sandler H.M., Northouse L., Hembroff L., Lin X., Greenfield T.K., Litwin M.S., Saigal C.S., et al. Quality of Life and Satisfaction with Outcome among Prostate-Cancer Survivors. N. Engl. J. Med. 2008;358:1250–1261. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa074311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Wright A.A., Zhang B., Ray A., Mack J.W., Trice E., Balboni T., Mitchell S.L., Jackson V.A., Block S.D., Maciejewski P.K., et al. Associations between End-of-Life Discussions, Patient Mental Health, Medical Care near Death, and Caregiver Bereavement Adjustment. JAMA J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2008;300:1665–1673. doi: 10.1001/jama.300.14.1665. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Spiegel D., Bloom J.R., Yalom I. Group Support for Patients with Metastatic Cancer: A Randomized Prospective Outcome Study. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry. 1981;38:527–533. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1980.01780300039004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Spiegel D., Giese-Davis J. Depression and cancer: Mechanisms and disease progression. Biol. Psychol. 2003;54:269–282. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3223(03)00566-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Cella D. The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An) Scale: A New Tool for the Assessment of Outcomes in Cancer Anemia and Fatigue. Semin. Hematol. 1997;34:13–19. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Litwin M.S., Hays R.D., Fink A., Ganz P.A., Leake B., Leach G.E., Brook R.H. Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Men Treated for Localized Prostate Cancer. JAMA J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1995;273:129–135. doi: 10.1001/jama.1995.03520260051032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Litwin M.S., Hays R.D., Fink A., Ganz P.A., Leake B., Brook R.H. The UCLA Prostate Cancer Index: Development, Reliability, and Validity of a Health-Related Quality of Life Measure. Med. Care. 1998;36:1002–1012. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199807000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Portenoy R.K., Thaler H.T., Kornblith A.B., McCarthy Lepore J., Friedlander-Klar H., Kiyasu E., Sobel K., Coyle N., Kemeny N., Norton L., et al. The Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale: An Instrument for the Evaluation of Symptom Prevalence, Characteristics and Distress. Eur. J. Cancer. 1994;30:1326–1336. doi: 10.1016/0959-8049(94)90182-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Portenoy R.K., Payne D., Jacobsen P. Breakthrough Pain: Characteristics and Impact in Patients with Cancer Pain. Pain. 1999;81:129–134. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(99)00006-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Brady M.J., Peterman A.H., Fitchett G., Mo M., Cella D. A Case for Including Spirituality in Quality of Life Measurement in Oncology. Psychooncology. 1999;8:417–428. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1611(199909/10)8:5<417::AID-PON398>3.0.CO;2-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Curt G.A., Breitbart W., Cella D., Groopman J.E., Horning S.J., Itri L.M., Johnson D.H., Miaskowski C., Scherr S.L., Portenoy R.K., et al. Impact of Cancer-Related Fatigue on the Lives of Patients: New Findings From the Fatigue Coalition. Oncologist. 2000;5:353–360. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.5-5-353. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Peterman A.H., Fitchett G., Brady M.J., Hernandez L., Cella D. Measuring Spiritual Well-Being in People with Cancer: The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy—Spiritual Well-Being Scale (FACIT-Sp) Ann. Behav. Med. 2002;24:49–58. doi: 10.1207/S15324796ABM2401_06. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Vogelzang N.J., Breitbart W., Cella D., Curt G.A., Groopman J.E., Horning S.J., Itri L.M., Johnson D.H., Saherr S.L., Portenoy R.K. Patient, Caregiver, and Oncologist Perceptions of Cancer-Related Fatigue: Results of a Tripart Assessment Survey. Semin. Hematol. 1997;34:4–12. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Yellen S.B., Cella D.F., Webster K., Blendowski C., Kaplan E. Measuring Fatigue and Other Anemia-Related Symptoms with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) Measurement System. J. Pain Symptom Manage. 1997;13:63–74. doi: 10.1016/S0885-3924(96)00274-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Cordova M.J., Cunningham L.L.C., Carlson C.R., Andrykowski M.A. Posttraumatic Growth Following Breast Cancer: A Controlled Comparison Study. Heal. Psychol. 2001;20:176–185. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.20.3.176. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Holland J.C., Bultz B.D. The NCCN Guideline for Distress Management: A Case for Making Distress the Sixth Vital Sign. J. Natl. Compr. Canc. Netw. 2007;5:3–7. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2007.0003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Kiecolt-Glaser J.K., Robles T.F., Heffner K.L., Loving T.J., Glaser R. Psycho-Oncology and Cancer: Psychoneuroimmunology and Cancer. Ann. Oncol. 2002;13:165–169. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdf655. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Hyland K. Self-Citation and Self-Reference: Credibility and Promotion in Academic Publication. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2003;54:251–259. doi: 10.1002/asi.10204. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Cronin B. Bibliometrics and beyond: Some Thoughts on Web-Based Citation Analysis. J. Inf. Sci. 2001;27:1–7. doi: 10.1177/016555150102700101. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Van Raan A. The Use of Bibliometric Analysis in Research Performance Assessment and Monitoring of Interdisciplinary Scientific Developments. TATuP. 2003;12 doi: 10.14512/tatup.12.1.20. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Moustafa K. Aberration of the Citation. Account. Res. 2016;23:230–244. doi: 10.1080/08989621.2015.1127763. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Anyi K.W.U., Zainab A.N., Anuar N.B. Bibliometric Studies on Single Journals: A Review. Malaysian J. Libr. Inf. Sci. 2009;14:17–55. [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Derogatis L.R., Morrow G.R., Fetting J., Penman D., Piasetsky S., Schmale A.M., Henrichs M., Carnicke C.L.M. The Prevalence of Psychiatric Disorders among Cancer Patients. JAMA J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1983;249:751–757. doi: 10.1001/jama.1983.03330300035030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Carver C.S., Pozo C., Harris S.D., Noriega V., Scheier M.F., Robinson D.S., Ketcham A.S., Moffat F.L., Clark K.C. How Coping Mediates the Effect of Optimism on Distress: A Study of Women With Early Stage Breast Cancer. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1993;65:375–390. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.65.2.375. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Spitzer W.O., Dobson A.J., Hall J., Chesterman E., Levi J., Shepherd R., Battista R.N., Catchlove B.R. Measuring the Quality of Life of Cancer Patients. A Concise QL-Index for Use by Physicians. J. Chronic Dis. 1981;34:585–597. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(81)90058-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Holmes M.D., Chen W.Y., Feskanich D., Kroenke C.H., Colditz G.A. Physical Activity and Survival after Breast Cancer Diagnosis. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2005;293:2479–2486. doi: 10.1001/jama.293.20.2479. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Murthy V.H., Krumholz H.M., Gross C.P. Participation in Cancer Clinical Trials: Race-, Sex-, and Age-Based Disparities. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2004;291:2720–2726. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.22.2720. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Serlin R.C., Mendoza T.R., Nakamura Y., Edwards K.R., Cleeland C.S. When Is Cancer Pain Mild, Moderate or Severe? Grading Pain Severity by Its Interference with Function. Pain. 1995;61:277–284. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(94)00178-H. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Wei J.T., Dunn R.L., Litwin M.S., Sandler H.M., Sanda M.G. Development and Validation of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) for Comprehensive Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life in Men with Prostate Cancer. Urology. 2000;56:899–905. doi: 10.1016/S0090-4295(00)00858-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Cassileth B.R., Zupkis R.V., Sutton-Smith K., March V. Information and Participation Preferences among Cancer Patients. Ann. Intern. Med. 1980;92:832–836. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-92-6-832. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Degner L.F., Kristjanson L.J., Bowman D., Sloan J.A., Carriere K.C., O’Neil J., Bilodeau B., Watson P., Mueller B. Information Needs and Decisional Preferences in Women with Breast Cancer. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1997;277:1485–1492. doi: 10.1001/jama.1997.03540420081039. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Bakitas M., Lyons K.D., Hegel M.T., Balan S., Brokaw F.C., Seville J., Hull J.G., Li Z., Tosteson T.D., Byock I.R., et al. Effects of a Palliative Care Intervention on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Advanced Cancer: The Project ENABLE II Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2009;302:741–749. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1198. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Fawzy F.I., Fawzy N.W., Hyun C.S., Elashoff R., Guthrie D., Fahey J.L., Morton D.L. Malignant Melanoma: Effects of an Early Structured Psychiatric Intervention, Coping, and Affective State on Recurrence and Survival 6 Years Later. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry. 1993;50:681–689. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1993.01820210015002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Schipper H., Clinch J., McMurray A., Levitt M. Measuring the Quality of Life of Cancer Patients: The Functional Living Index-Cancer: Development and Validation. J. Clin. Oncol. 1984;2:472–483. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1984.2.5.472. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Zech D.F.J., Grond S., Lynch J., Hertel D., Lehmann K.A. Validation of World Health Organization Guidelines for Cancer Pain Relief: A 10-Year Prospective Study. Pain. 1995;63:65–76. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(95)00017-M. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Wolfe J., Grier H.E., Klar N., Levin S.B., Ellenbogen J.M., Salem-Schatz S., Emanuel E.J., Weeks J.C. Symptoms and Suffering at the End of Life in Children with Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2000;342:326–333. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200002033420506. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Shacham S. A Shortened Version of the Profile of Mood States. J. Pers. Assess. 1983;47:305–306. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4703_14. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Degner L.F., Sloan J.A.J.A. Decision making during serious illness: What role do patients really want to play? J. Clin. Epidemiol. 1992;45:941–950. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(92)90110-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Speck R.M., Courneya K.S., Mâsse L.C., Duval S., Schmitz K.H. An Update of Controlled Physical Activity Trials in Cancer Survivors: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Cancer Surviv. 2010;4:87–100. doi: 10.1007/s11764-009-0110-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Foley K.M. The Treatment of Cancer Pain. N. Engl. J. Med. 1985;313:84–95. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198507113130205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Demark-Wahnefried W., Aziz N.M., Rowland J.H., Pinto B.M. Riding the crest of the teachable moment: Promoting long-term health after the diagnosis of cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2005;23:5814–5830. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.01.230. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Burgess C., Cornelius V., Love S., Graham J., Richards M., Ramirez A. Depression and Anxiety in Women with Early Breast Cancer: Five Year Observational Cohort Study. Br. Med. J. 2005;330:702–705. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38343.670868.D3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Calman K.C. Quality of Life in Cancer Patients—An Hypothesis. J. Med. Ethics. 1984;10:124–127. doi: 10.1136/jme.10.3.124. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Bower J.E., Ganz P.A., Desmond K.A., Rowland J.H., Meyerowitz B.E., Belin T.R. Fatigue in Breast Cancer Survivors: Occurrence, Correlates, and Impact on Quality of Life. J. Clin. Oncol. 2000;18:743–753. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2000.18.4.743. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Reiche E.M.V., Nunes S.O.V., Morimoto H.K. Stress, Depression, the Immune System, and Cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2004;5:617–625. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(04)01597-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Zimmermann C., Swami N., Krzyzanowska M., Hannon B., Leighl N., Oza A., Moore M., Rydall A., Rodin G., Tannock I., et al. Early Palliative Care for Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial. Lancet. 2014;383:1721–1730. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62416-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Rock C.L., Doyle C., Demark-Wahnefried W., Meyerhardt J., Courneya K.S., Schwartz A.L., Bandera E.V., Hamilton K.K., Grant B., McCullough M., et al. Nutrition and Physical Activity Guidelines for Cancer Survivors. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2012;62:242–274. doi: 10.3322/caac.21142. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Meyer T.J., Mark M.M. Effects of Psychosocial Interventions with Adult Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Experiments. Heal. Psychol. 1995;14:101–108. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.14.2.101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Breitbart W., Rosenfeld B., Pessin H., Kaim M., Funesti-Esch J., Galietta M., Nelson C.J., Brescia R. Depression, Hopelessness, and Desire for Hastened Death in Terminally Ill Patients with Cancer. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2000;284:2907–2911. doi: 10.1001/jama.284.22.2907. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Antoni M.H., Lehman J.M., Kilbourn K.M., Boyers A.E., Culver J.L., Alferi S.M., Yount S.E., McGregor B.A., Arena P.L., Harris S.D., et al. Cognitive-Behavioral Stress Management Intervention Decreases the Prevalence of Depression and Enhances Benefit Finding among Women under Treatment for Early-Stage Breast Cancer. Health Psychol. 2001;20:20–32. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.20.1.20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Detmar S.B., Muller M.J., Schornagel J.H., Wever L.D.V., Aaronson N.K. Health-Related Quality-of-Life Assessments and Patient-Physician Communication: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2002;288:3027–3034. doi: 10.1001/jama.288.23.3027. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.De Haes M., Van Knippenberg F.C., Neijt J.P. Measuring Psychological and Physical Distress in Cancer Patients: Structure and Application of the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist. Br. J. Cancer. 1990;62:1034–1038. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1990.434. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.McNeely M.L., Campbell K.L., Rowe B.H., Klassen T.P., Mackey J.R., Courneya K.S. Effects of exercise on breast cancer patients and survivors: A systematic review and meta-analysis. CMAJ. 2006;175:34–41. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.051073. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101.Glimelius B., Ekström K., Hoffman K., Graf W., Sjödén P.O., Haglund U., Svensson C., Enander L.K., Linné T., Sellström H., et al. Randomized Comparison between Chemotherapy plus Best Supportive Care with Best Supportive Care in Advanced Gastric Cancer. Ann. Oncol. 1997;8:163–168. doi: 10.1023/A:1008243606668. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102.Goodwin P.J., Leszcz M., Ennis M., Koopmans J., Vincent L., Guther H., Drysdale E., Hundleby M., Chochinov H.M., Navarro M., et al. The Effect of Group Psychosocial Support on Survival in Metastatic Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2001;345:1719–1726. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa011871. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103.Lerman C., Narod S., Schulman K., Hughes C., Gomez-Caminero A., Bonney G., Gold K., Trock B., Main D., Lynch J., et al. BRCA1 Testing in Families with Hereditary Breast-Ovarian Cancer: A Prospective Study of Patient Decision Making and Outcomes. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1996;275:1885–1892. doi: 10.1001/jama.1996.03530480027036. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104.Speca M., Carlson L.E., Goodey E., Angen M. A Randomized, Wait-List Controlled Clinical Trial: The Effect of a Mindfulness Meditation-Based Stress Reduction Program on Mood and Symptoms of Stress in Cancer Outpatients. Psychosom. Med. 2000;62:613–622. doi: 10.1097/00006842-200009000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105.Molassiotis A., Fernandez-Ortega P., Pud D., Ozden G., Scott J.A., Panteli V., Margulies A., Browall M., Magri M., Selvekerova S., et al. Use of Complementary and Alternative Medicine in Cancer Patients: A European Survey. Ann. Oncol. 2005;16:655–663. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdi110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106.Taylor S.E., Lichtman R.R., Wood J.V. Attributions, Beliefs about Control, and Adjustment to Breast Cancer. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1984;46:489–502. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.46.3.489. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Fallowfield L., Jenkins V., Farewell V., Saul J., Duffy A., Eves R. Efficacy of a Cancer Research UK Communication Skills Training Model for Oncologists: A Randomised Controlled Trial. Lancet. 2002;359:650–656. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)07810-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108.Gomes B., Higginson I.J. Factors Influencing Death at Home in Terminally Ill Patients with Cancer: Systematic Review. BMJ. 2006;332:515–518. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38740.614954.55. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109.Slevin M.L., Stubbs L., Plant H.J., Wilson P., Gregory W.M., Armes P.J., Downer S.M. Attitudes to Chemotherapy: Comparing Views of Patients with Cancer with Those of Doctors, Nurses, and General Public. Br. Med. J. 1990;300:1458–1460. doi: 10.1136/bmj.300.6737.1458. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110.Meyerowitz B.E., Chaiken S. The Effect of Message Framing on Breast Self-Examination Attitudes, Intentions, and Behavior. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1987;52:500–510. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.500. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111.Scheithauer W., Rosen H., Kornek G.V., Sebesta C., Depisch D. Randomised Comparison of Combination Chemotherapy plus Supportive Care with Supportive Care Alone in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Br. Med. J. 1993;306:752–755. doi: 10.1136/bmj.306.6880.752. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112.Fallowfield L.J., Hall A., Maguire G.P., Baum M. Psychological Outcomes of Different Treatment Policies in Women with Early Breast Cancer Outside a Clinical Trial. Br. Med. J. 1990;301:575–580. doi: 10.1136/bmj.301.6752.575. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113.Rutten L.J., Arora N.K., Bakos A.D., Aziz N., Rowland J. Information Needs and Sources of Information among Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review of Research (1980–2003) Patient Educ. Couns. 2005;57:250–261. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2004.06.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114.Leydon G.M., Boulton M., Moynihan C., Jones A., Mossman J., Boudioni M., McPherson K. Cancer Patients’ Information Needs and Information Seeking Behaviour: In Depth Interview Study. Br. Med. J. 2000;320:909–913. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7239.909. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115.McCorkle R., Young K. Development of a Symptom Distress Scale. Cancer Nurs. 1978;1:373–378. doi: 10.1097/00002820-197810000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116.Riley V. Psychoneuroendocrine Influences on Immunocompetence and Neoplasia. Science. 1981;212:1100–1109. doi: 10.1126/science.7233204. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117.Brewer N.T., Fazekas K.I. Predictors of HPV Vaccine Acceptability: A Theory-Informed, Systematic Review. Prev. Med. 2007;45:107–114. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.05.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118.Kreuter M.W., Lukwago S.N., Bucholtz D.C., Clark E.M., Sanders-Thompson V. Achieving Cultural Appropriateness in Health Promotion Programs: Targeted and Tailored Approaches. Health Educ. Behav. 2003;30:133–146. doi: 10.1177/1090198102251021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119.Miller G.E., Cohen S., Ritchey A.K. Chronic Psychological Stress and the Regulation of Pro-Inflammatory Cytokines: A Glucocorticoid-Resistance Model. Health Psychol. 2002;21:531–541. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.21.6.531. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120.Hudson M.M., Mertens A.C., Yasui Y., Hobbie W., Chen H., Gurney J.G., Yeazel M., Recklitis C.J., Marina N., Robison L.R., et al. Health Status of Adult Long-Term Survivors of Childhood Cancer: A Report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 2003;290:1583–1592. doi: 10.1001/jama.290.12.1583. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121.Steineck G., Helgesen F., Adolfsson J., Dickman P.W., Johansson J.E., Norlén B.J., Holmberg L. Quality of Life after Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting. N. Engl. J. Med. 2002;347:790–796. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa021483. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122.Mulhern R.K., Merchant T.E., Gajjar A., Reddick W.E., Kun L.E. Late Neurocognitive Sequelae in Survivors of Brain Tumours in Childhood. Lancet Oncol. 2004;5:399–408. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(04)01507-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123.Grunfeld E., Coyle D., Whelan T., Clinch J., Reyno L., Earle C.C., Willan A., Viola R., Coristine M., Janz T., et al. Family Caregiver Burden: Results of a Longitudinal Study of Breast Cancer Patients and Their Principal Caregivers. CMAJ. 2004;170:1795–1801. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.1031205. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124.Ghezzi P., Magnanini S., Rinaldini M., Berardi F., Di Biagio G., Testare F., Tavoni N., Schittulli F., D’Amico C., Pedicini T., et al. Impact of Follow-up Testing on Survival and Health-Related Quality of Life in Breast Cancer Patients: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1994;271:1587–1592. doi: 10.1001/jama.1994.03510440047031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125.Zhang B., Wright A.A., Huskamp H.A., Nilsson M.E., Maciejewski M.L., Earle C.C., Block S.D., Maciejewski P.K., Prigerson H.G. Health Care Costs in the Last Week of Life Associations with End-of-Life Conversations. Arch. Intern. Med. 2009;169:480–488. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2008.587. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126.Basch E., Deal A.M., Kris M.G., Scher H.I., Hudis C.A., Sabbatini P., Rogak L., Bennett A.V., Dueck A.C., Atkinson T.M., et al. Symptom Monitoring with Patient-Reported Outcomes during Routine Cancer Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 2016;34:557–565. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.0830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 127.Hann D., Winter K., Jacobsen P. Measurement of Depressive Symptoms in Cancer Patients: Evaluation of the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) J. Psychosom. Res. 1999;46:437–443. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3999(99)00004-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 128.Greer S., Morris T., Pettingale K.W. Psychological Response to Breast Cancer: Effect on Outcome. Lancet. 1979;314:785–787. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(79)92127-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 129.Jacobsen P.B., Donovan K.A., Trask P.C., Fleishman S.B., Zabora J., Baker F., Holland J.C. Screening for Psychologic Distress in Ambulatory Cancer Patients: A Multicenter Evaluation of the Distress Thermometer. Cancer. 2005;103:1494–1502. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20940. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 130.Blanchard C.M., Courneya K.S., Stein K. Cancer Survivors’ Adherence to Lifestyle Behavior Recommendations and Associations with Health-Related Quality of Life: Results from the American Cancer Society’s SCS-II. J. Clin. Oncol. 2008;26:2198–2204. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.6217. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 131.Teunissen S.C., Wesker W., Kruitwagen C., de Haes H.C., Voest E.E., de Graeff A. Symptom Prevalence in Patients with Incurable Cancer: A Systematic Review. JPSM. 2007;34:94–104. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2006.10.015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 132.Gøtzsche P.C., Jørgensen K.J. Screening for Breast Cancer with Mammography. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 2013;2013:CD001877. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001877.pub5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 133.Watson M., Haviland J.S., Greer S., Davidson J., Bliss J.M. Influence of Psychological Response on Survival in Breast Cancer: A Population-Based Cohort Study. Lancet. 1999;354:1331–1336. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)11392-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 134.Lawlor P.G., Gagnon B., Mancini I.L., Pereira J.L., Hanson J., Suarez-Almazor M.E., Bruera E.D. Occurrence, Causes, and Outcome of Delirium in Patients with Advanced Cancer: A Prospective Study. Arch. Intern. Med. 2002;160:786–794. doi: 10.1001/archinte.160.6.786. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 135.Burstein H.J., Gelber S., Guadagnoli E., Weeks J.C. Use of Alternative Medicine by Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 1999;340:1733–1739. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199906033402206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 136.Moorey S., Greer S., Watson M., Gorman C., Rowden L., Tunmore R., Robertson B., Bliss J. The Factor Structure and Factor Stability of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale in Patients with Cancer. Br. J. Psychiatry. 1991;158:255–259. doi: 10.1192/bjp.158.2.255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 137.McClain C.S., Rosenfeld B., Breitbart W. Effect of Spiritual Well-Being on End-of-Life Despair in Terminally-Ill Cancer Patients. Lancet. 2003;361:1603–1607. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)13310-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 138.Fawzy F.I., Cousins N., Fawzy N.W., Kemeny M.E., Elashoff R., Morton D. A Structured Psychiatric Intervention for Cancer Patients: I. Changes over Time in Methods of Coping and Affective Disturbance. Arch. Gen. Psychiatry. 1990;47:720–725. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.1990.01810200028004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 139.Satin J.R., Linden W., Phillips M.J. Depression as a Predictor of Disease Progression and Mortality in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis. Cancer. 2009;115:5349–5361. doi: 10.1002/cncr.24561. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 140.Novack D.H., Plumer R., Smith R.L., Morrow G.R., Ochitill H., Bennett J.M. Changes in Physicians’ Attitudes Toward Telling the Cancer Patient. JAMA J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1979;241:897–900. doi: 10.1001/jama.1979.03290350017012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 141.Sears S.R., Stanton A.L., Danoff-Burg S. The Yellow Brick Road and the Emerald City: Benefit Finding, Positive Reappraisal Coping, and Posttraumatic Growth in Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer. Health Psychol. 2003;22:487–497. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.22.5.487. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 142.Piper B.F., Dibble S.L., Dodd M.J., Weiss M.C., Slaughter R.E., Paul S.M. The Revised Piper Fatigue Scale: Psychometric Evaluation in Women with Breast Cancer. Oncol. Nurs. Forum. 1998;25:677–684. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 143.Helgeson V.S., Cohen S. Social Support and Adjustment to Cancer: Reconciling Descriptive, Correlational, and Intervention Research. Health Psychol. 1996;15:135–148. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.15.2.135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 144.Mcneil B.J., Weichselbaum R., Pauker S.G. Speech and Survival: Tradeoffs between Quality and Quantity of Life in Laryngeal Cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 1981;305:982–987. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198110223051704. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 145.Stanton A.L., Danoff-Burg S., Cameron C.L., Bishop M., Collins C.A., Kirk S.B., Sworowski L.A., Twillman R. Emotionally Expressive Coping Predicts Psychological and Physical Adjustment to Breast Cancer. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 2000;68:875–882. doi: 10.1037/0022-006X.68.5.875. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 146.Doyle C., Kushi L.H., Byers T., Courneya K.S., Demark-Wahnefried W., Grant B., McTiernan A., Rock C.L., Thompson C., Gansler T., et al. Nutrition and Physical Activity During and After Cancer Treatment: An American Cancer Society Guide for Informed Choices. CA Cancer J. Clin. 2006;56:323–353. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.56.6.323. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study.


Articles from Healthcare are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

RESOURCES