Elites in social networks: An axiomatic approach to power balance and Price's square root law

Bibliometric analysis of hotspots and frontiers in cancer-related fatigue among ovarian cancer survivors

Objectives

To explore and analyze research hotspots and frontiers in CRF in ovarian cancer patients to provide an evidence-based basis for scholars and policymakers.

Background

Ovarian cancer is one of the most common and lethal gynecological malignancies. Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) is an annoying and pervasive side-effect that seriously affects the activities of daily living and decreases the quality of life (QoL) of cancer survivors.

Methods

The literature was retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection (WOSCC) from inception to 2021-12-31. CiteSpace was used to discuss research countries, institutions, authors, and keywords.

Results

This study ultimately included 755 valid publications, and the number of publications showed a gradual upward trend. The countries, institutions, authors, and journals that have published the most articles and cited the most frequently were the United States, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Michael Friedlander and Amit M Oza, Gynecologic Oncology, and Journal of Clinical Oncology. The top three high-frequency keywords were Ovarian cancer, chemotherapy, and clinical trial. The top three keywords with the strongest citation bursts were cyclophosphamide, double-blind, and open-label.

Conclusions

Conducting multi-center, large-sample, randomized controlled clinical trials to determine whether chemotherapeutic agents have severe adverse effects and to discuss the relationship between CRF and QoL and overall survival in cancer survivors are hotspots in this field. The new trends may be applying double-blind, randomized controlled trials to clarify the causes of CRF and open-label, randomized trials to determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of chemotherapeutic agents.

Creators of the Vocabulary of Anglophone Psychology and Their Relationships

The vocabulary of anglophone psychology largely developed during the 19th and early 20th centuries. The creators of this vocabulary include such well-known names as William James, Joan Riviere, E. L. Thorndike, and James Strachey. Along with others, they invented many new words and word meanings for psychology. The more a psychologist responded to the need for new vocabulary the more likely were they to be mentioned in publications. Moreover, linguistically creative psychologists occurred together in publications to a greater extent than less linguistically creative psychologists, with William James having the most co-occurrences. A network is presented that links each member of a sample of 59 linguistically creative psychologists to the other member of the sample with whom they most frequently co-occur (e.g., E. L. Thorndike co-occurs most frequently with William James). For each pair, we provide brief descriptions of their similarities and/or differences. There is also a cluster of translators who created new English words and word meanings in order to capture the meanings of words in other languages that had no satisfactory equivalents in English. Generally speaking, the more success psychologists have had in filling the lacunae in psychology’s vocabulary, the more they have been recognized by others.