Methodology: We identified all cancer research papers from OIC countries in the Web of Science from 2008 to 2017 with a filter based on journal names and title words, with high precision and recall. We analysed the country outputs, the cancer sites investigated, the types of research, sources of funding and the citations to the papers.
Results: There were 49,712 cancer research papers over this period. The leading countries in terms of output were Turkey, Iran, Egypt and Malaysia, but the most cited papers were from Qatar, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia. International collaboration was low, except in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. The site-specific cancers accounting for most research were breast and blood, correlating with their disease burden in the OIC countries, but lung, cervical and oesophageal cancers were relatively under-researched. Most funding from within the OIC countries was from their own university sector.
Conclusion: Cancer is seriously under-researched in most of the OIC countries. This will undermine the ability of these countries and OIC as a whole to deliver on better cancer control for their populations. New policies, OIC leadership and funding are urgently needed to address this situation.
Method: This cross-sectional study was carried out in urban areas in the Fars and Mazandaran provinces in 2016. The sample consisted of 143 and 96 family physicians, respectively, in Fars and Mazandaran provinces and was selected using the stratified random sampling method. Data were collected using a questionnaire and included both sociodemographic variables and factors assessing the family physicians' satisfaction levels. Each factor was scored based on a Likert scale from 0 to 5 points, and any satisfaction level higher than 3 out of 5 was equated with being satisfied.
Results: The overall satisfaction levels among family physicians in Fars and Mazandaran provinces were 2.77±0.53 and 3.37±0.56, respectively, revealing a statistically significant difference between provinces (p<0.001). Moreover, the mean satisfaction scores for the performances of healthcare centers, insurance companies, specialists, healthcare workers, and the population covered were 2.78±0.1, 2.54±0.9, 2.52±0.8, 4.24±0.07, and 2.96±0.8, respectively. The family physicians' levels of satisfaction were significantly correlated with population size (p=0.02, r= -0.106), and willingness to stay in an urban family physician program (p<0.001, r= +0.398).
Conclusion: This study revealed that family physicians exhibited a low level of satisfaction with the urban family physician program. Given the direct association between family physicians' satisfaction levels and retention in the program, it is expected that family physicians will no longer stay in the program, and it is likely to have subsequent executive problems.