Publication Disparity in Lymphomatous Hematologic Radiation Oncology.

[PURPOSE] Studies discussing radiation for hematologic malignancies are perceived to face significant hardship getting published in high-impact nonradiation oncology journals. This study reports on the trend of "lymphoma radiation" publications in terms of journal type, topic and authors' specialty.

[METHODS AND MATERIALS] A SCOPUS review of published papers between 2020 and 2024 was performed. Studies included were those that had "radiation OR radiotherapy AND lymphoma" in their title. Articles were assessed for their topic, authors' specialty, journal type and impact factor (IF), and number of citations. Papers were categorized into 2 groups: published in radiation oncology (RO) versus non-RO journals.

[RESULTS] A total of 402 papers were published between 2020 and 2024 and met our inclusion criteria; 108 papers were published in RO and 294 were published in non-RO journals. RO journals had lower IF (0% vs 13% with IF ≥ 10, P < .001), however, papers published in RO journals were significantly more cited compared with those in non-RO journals (median, 2 vs 1; P = .002). Non-RO journals published more papers on radiation negative clinical outcomes (23%) compared with RO journals (10%), (P = .005). Among studies reporting radiation negative clinical outcomes, 15 (19%) were published in high IF (≥10) journals. In contrast, 19 (7%) of studies reporting positive clinical outcomes appeared in high IF journals (P = .001). Compared with RO, non-RO authors were more likely to publish on radiation therapy negative outcomes (36% vs 10%, P < .001), in high IF ≥ 10 (17% vs 5%, P < .001) and non-RO journals (91% vs 62%, P < .001).

[CONCLUSIONS] "Radiation OR Radiotherapy AND lymphoma" studies that are published in RO journals are better cited, despite lower IF. Lymphoma studies reporting on radiation negative clinical outcomes are more likely to be published in non-RO and higher IF journals, and by non-RO authors.