Book chapter

Thematic atlas of Italian oncological research: the analysis of public IRCCS

Corrado Cuccurullo
University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Italy - ORCID: 0000-0002-7401-8575

Luca D’Aniello
University of Campania Luigi Vanvitelli, Italy - ORCID: 0000-0003-1019-9212

Maria Spano
University of Naples Federico II, Italy - ORCID: 0000-0002-3103-2342


This paper has been developed in the frame of the research project “V:ALERE 2019” focused on Italian public-owned Academic Medical Centers. The main aim of the project is to provide evidence, advice, and remarks to help the agents of the public health system to address the many challenges that they face. In recent years, there is an increasing recognition of the potential value of research evidence as one of the many factors considered by policymakers and practitioners. Even more, in the case of medical science, the analysis of research and its impact is indispensable, in light of its implications for public health. The starting point for mapping a research area is to review the related scientific literature because by synthesizing past research findings, it is possible to effectively use the existing knowledge base and advance lines of future researches. In this sense, bibliometrics becomes useful, by providing a structured analysis to a large body of information, to infer trends over time, themes researched, and to show the “big picture” of extant research. In particular, in this work, we focus our attention on the scientific production of the last 20 years of the Scientific Institutes for Research, Hospitalization, and Healthcare (IRCCS “Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico”) specialized in the oncology research. IRCCS are biomedical institutions of relevant national interest that drive clinical assistance in strong relation to research activities. They are committed to being a benchmark for the whole public health system for both the quality of patient care and the innovation skills in the field of the organization. All the analyses were carried out by using the Bibliometrix, an open-source tool for quantitative research in scientometrics and bibliometrics that includes all the main bibliometric methods of analysis.
Read more

Keywords: Bibliometrics, Oncological research, Public health



Pages: 109-114

Published by: Firenze University Press

Publication year: 2021

DOI: 10.36253/978-88-5518-304-8.22

Download PDF

© 2021 Author(s)
Content licence CC BY 4.0
Metadata licence CC0 1.0


Publication year: 2021

DOI: 10.36253/978-88-5518-304-8.22

Download XML

© 2021 Author(s)
Content licence CC BY 4.0
Metadata licence CC0 1.0


  1. Aria, M., Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), pp. 959-975.
  2. Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J. L., Lambiotte, R., Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2008. URL:
  3. Bornmann, L., Haunschild, R. (2016). Citation score normalized by cited references (CSNCR): The introduction of a new citation impact indicator. Journal of Informetrics, 10(3), pp. 875-887.
  4. Cahlik, T. (2000). Comparison of the maps of science. Scientometrics, 49(3), pp. 373-387.
  5. Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., Turner, W. A., Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Social Science Information, 22 (2), pp. 191-235.
  6. Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., Herrera, F. (2011). An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the fuzzy sets theory field. Journal of Informetrics, 5(1), pp. 146–166.
  7. Cuccurullo, C., Aria, M., Sarto, F. (2016). Foundations and trends in performance management. A twenty-five years bibliometric analysis in business and public administration domains. Scientometrics, 108(2), pp. 595-611.
  8. Eck, N. J. V., Waltman, L. (2009). How to normalize cooccurrence data? An analysis of some well‐known similarity measures. Journal of the American society for information science and technology, 60(8), pp. 1635-1651.
  9. Fortunato, S. (2010). Community detection in graphs. Physics Reports, 486(3), pp. 75-174.
  10. Garfield, E. (1990). Keywords Plus®: ISI's breakthrough retrieval method. Part 1. Expanding your searching power on Current Contents on Diskette, Current Contents, 32, pp. 5-9.
  11. Liberati A., Altman D. G., Tetzlaff J., Mulrow C., Gøtzsche P. C., Ioannidis J. P. A., Clarke M., Devereaux P. J., Kleijnen J., Moher D. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 62(10), pp. e1-e34.
  12. Noyons, E., Moed, H., van Raan, A. (1999). Integrating research performance analysis and science mapping. Scientometrics, 46(3), pp. 591-604.
  13. Wang, H., Zhao, Y., Dang, B., Han, P., Shi, X. (2019). "Network centrality and innovation performance: the role of formal and informal institutions in emerging economies", Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 34(6), pp. 1388-1400.
  14. Zhao, D. (2010). Characteristics and impact of grant-funded research: a case study of the library and information science field. Scientometrics, 84(2), pp. 293-306. 10.1007/s11192-010-0191-y.

Export citation

Selected format

Usage statistics policy

  • 16Chapter Downloads

Cita come:
Cuccurullo, C.; D’Aniello, L.; Spano, M.; 2021; Thematic atlas of Italian oncological research: the analysis of public IRCCS. Firenze, Firenze University Press.


Indici e aggregatori bibliometrici