, Volume 117, Issue 3, pp 2195–2205 | Cite as

The story behind Oncotarget? A bibliometric analysis

  • David A. GronebergEmail author
  • Axel Fischer
  • Doris Klingelhöfer
  • Michael H. K. Bendels
  • David Quarcoo
  • Dörthe Brüggmann


Being the most proliferative journal of oncology a cancer research of the past decade, the Open Access journal Oncotarget had reached more than 20,000 publications and a relatively high impact factor score in the past years. In 2018, the journal citation report decided to withdraw the status of an impact factor journal. Since there was a large discussion in the scientific community and specific reasons for the withdrawal were not stated, this bibliometric analysis was performed to assess if Oncotarget exhibits any differences in its bibliometric structure compared to other journals. For this purpose, we used the “New Quality and Quantity Indices in Sciences” platform and analyzed 20,000 Oncotarget articles. Density equalizing mapping technique helps to construct maps of cancer research in Oncotarget and shows that it has led to a unique global landscape which is not asymmetrically dominated by the Western hemisphere but exhibits a publishing architecture with a pronounced emphasis on Chinese articles.


Oncotarget Network Bibliometry Architecture Structure 


  1. Bruggmann, D., Berges, L., Klingelhofer, D., Bauer, J., Bendels, M., Louwen, F., et al. (2017a). Polycystic ovary syndrome: Analysis of the global research architecture using density equalizing mapping. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 34(6), 627–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bruggmann, D., Lohlein, L. K., Louwen, F., Quarcoo, D., Jaque, J., Klingelhofer, D., et al. (2015). Caesarean section–a density-equalizing mapping study to depict its global research architecture. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(11), 14690–14708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruggmann, D., Maule, L. S., Klingelhofer, D., Schoffel, N., Gerber, A., Jaque, J. M., et al. (2016a). World-wide architecture of osteoporosis research: Density-equalizing mapping studies and gender analysis. Climacteric, 19(5), 463–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bruggmann, D., Pulch, K., Klingelhofer, D., Pearce, C. L., & Groneberg, D. A. (2017b). Ovarian cancer: Density equalizing mapping of the global research architecture. International Journal of Health Geographics, 16(1), 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bruggmann, D., Richter, T., Klingelhofer, D., Gerber, A., Bundschuh, M., Jaque, J., et al. (2016b). Global architecture of gestational diabetes research: Density-equalizing mapping studies and gender analysis. Nutrition Journal, 15, 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruggmann, D., Wagner, C., Klingelhofer, D., Schoffel, N., Bendels, M., Louwen, F., et al. (2017c). Maternal depression research: Socioeconomic analysis and density-equalizing mapping of the global research architecture. Archives of Women’s Mental Health, 20(1), 25–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Garfield, E. (1964). Science citation index–a new dimension in indexing. Science, 144(3619), 649–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Garfield, E. (1996). How can impact factors be improved? BMJ, 313(7054), 411–413.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gastner, M. T., & Newman, M. E. (2004). From The cover: Diffusion-based method for producing density-equalizing maps. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 101(20), 7499–7504.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gotting, M., Schwarzer, M., Gerber, A., Klingelhofer, D., & Groneberg, D. A. (2017). Pulmonary hypertension: Scientometric analysis and density-equalizing mapping. PLoS ONE, 12(1), e0169238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Groneberg, D. A., Geier, V., Klingelhofer, D., Gerber, A., Kuch, U., & Kloft, B. (2016). Snakebite envenoming—A combined density equalizing mapping and scientometric analysis of the publication history. PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, 10(11), e0005046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Groneberg, D. A., Rahimian, S., Bundschuh, M., Schwarzer, M., Gerber, A., & Kloft, B. (2015). Telemedicine—a scientometric and density equalizing analysis. The Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 10, 38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Groneberg-Kloft, B., Fischer, T. C., Quarcoo, D., & Scutaru, C. (2009a). New quality and quantity indices in science (NewQIS): The study protocol of an international project. The Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 4, 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Groneberg-Kloft, B., Klingelhoefer, D., Zitnik, S. E., & Scutaru, C. (2013). Traffic medicine-related research: A scientometric analysis. BMC Public Health, 13, 541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Groneberg-Kloft, B., Kreiter, C., Welte, T., Fischer, A., Quarcoo, D., & Scutaru, C. (2008a). Interfield dysbalances in research input and output benchmarking: Visualisation by density equalizing procedures. International Journal of Health Geographics, 7, 48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Groneberg-Kloft, B., Quarcoo, D., & Scutaru, C. (2009b). Quality and quantity indices in science: Use of visualization tools. EMBO Reports, 10(8), 800–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Groneberg-Kloft, B., Scutaru, C., Fischer, A., Welte, T., Kreiter, C., & Quarcoo, D. (2009c). Analysis of research output parameters: Density equalizing mapping and citation trend analysis. BMC Health Services Research, 9, 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Groneberg-Kloft, B., Scutaru, C., Kreiter, C., Kolzow, S., Fischer, A., & Quarcoo, D. (2008b). Institutional operating figures in basic and applied sciences: Scientometric analysis of quantitative output benchmarking. Health Research Policy and Systems, 6, 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Koster, C., Klingelhofer, D., Groneberg, D. A., & Schwarzer, M. (2016). Rotavirus—Global research density equalizing mapping and gender analysis. Vaccine, 34(1), 90–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lankers, P. (2018). Clarivate Analytics Mysteriously De-Indexes Key Journals. from
  21. Oncotarget. (2017). “Spotlight.” Retrieved 2018-09-17, 2018, from
  22. Oncotarget. (2018). “For authors.” Retrieved 2018-09-17, 2018, from
  23. Oncotarget. (2018). “Main Homepage.” Retrieved 2018-03-03, 2018, from
  24. Pendlebury, D. A. (2018). “Standards and Selectivity: Our Enduring Mission.” Retrieved 2018-09-17, 2018, from
  25. RetractionWatch (2018). “High-profile indexing service punishes 20 journals, issues unusual warning about five others, URL:, accessed Aug 2018.”.
  26. RetractionWatch (2018). “Retraction Watch, Indexing company praises cancer journal, then kicks it out, URL:, accessed Aug 2018.”
  27. Schreiber, M., Klingelhofer, D., Groneberg, D. A., & Bruggmann, D. (2016). Patient safety: The landscape of the global research output and gender distribution. British Medical Journal Open, 6(2), e008322.Google Scholar
  28. Scutaru, C., Quarcoo, D., Takemura, M., Welte, T., Fischer, T. C., & Groneberg-Kloft, B. (2010). Density-equalizing mapping and scientometric benchmarking in Industrial Health. Industrial Health, 48(2), 197–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sevinc, A. (2004). Web of science: A unique method of cited reference searching. Journal of the National Medical Association, 96(7), 980–983.Google Scholar
  30. Sevinc, A. (2005). Multilingual approach to “Web of Science”. Journal of the National Medical Association, 97(1), 116–117.Google Scholar
  31. Vitzthum, K., Scutaru, C., Musial-Bright, L., Quarcoo, D., Welte, T., Spallek, M., et al. (2010). Scientometric analysis and combined density-equalizing mapping of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) research. PLoS ONE, 5(6), e11254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zimmer, K. (2017). “Oncotarget Journal Cut from Medline.” The Scientist

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Epidemiology, The Institute of Occupational Medicine, Social Medicine and Environmental MedicineGoethe-UniversityFrankfurtGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Occupational MedicineCharité – UniversitätsmedizinBerlinGermany
  3. 3.Free University BerlinBerlinGermany
  4. 4.Humboldt-University BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations