Scientometric analysis reveals trends and citation patterns in uro-oncology, suggesting better data curation is needed.
Background: Uro-oncology, a multidisciplinary field at the intersection of urology and oncology, holds a pivotal role in the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of genitourinary cancers. Quantitative and qualitative evaluation of scientific publications, particularly review articles, in the field of uro-oncology provides comprehensive insights into the research landscape. This study provides a scientometric and bibliographic analysis of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in this field based on publications indexed in Scopus between 2020 and 2025. Methods: Employing a descriptive-analytical design, we analyzed publication trends, citation patterns, core journals, key authors, and collaboration networks using bibliometric tools like R (Bibliometrix, Biblioshiny) and VOSviewer. Results: Our findings reveal a notable decline in the annual growth rate of publications (−63.18%) and a significant reduction in average citations per article. While core journals such as Cancers , Frontiers in Oncology , and International Journal of Molecular Sciences dominate the field, inconsistencies in Scopus metadata, particularly missing citation counts and science categories, limit the accuracy of bibliometric analysis. Despite these challenges, key researchers and consistent focus on areas like immunotherapy and biomarker development are evident. Conclusion: The study highlights the need for better data curation, targeted funding, and stronger international collaboration to revitalize uro-oncology research.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shilanabad et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: