Aspiring Medical Science Liaisons (MSLs) and MSLs in career transition often face the challenge of staying competitive without access to proprietary tools or institutional resources. Yet, they must demonstrate strategic thinking, scientific fluency, and familiarity with the research landscape to break into or return to the pharmaceutical industry. In this context, publicly available bibliometric tools become powerful equalizers. These platforms allow MSLs to conduct landscape assessments, identify KOLs (Key Opinion Leaders), uncover unmet medical needs, and plan territory strategies. This article outlines how bibliometrics can support MSLs not currently embedded in pharma while remaining valuable to those already in the role.
My Journey with Bibliometrics
I first encountered bibliometrics a decade ago during my early career as a medical affairs associate. Part of my role in a regenerative medicine medical device company involved supporting publication planning, my entry point into bibliometric analysis. Through it, I gained insights into research landscapes, identified KOLs, and uncovered literature gaps that informed medical affairs strategy and cross-functional collaboration. That foundation continues to shape how I use bibliometrics in my current MSL work—enhancing thought leader engagement and staying aligned with cutting-edge developments.
What is Bibliometrics?
Bibliometrics is the quantitative study of academic publications (1). It uses trends like publication volume and metrics such as citation counts, h-index, and journal impact factors to assess scholarly influence. Citation counts reflect how often a publication is referenced; the h-index combines productivity and impact; impact factors assess journal credibility and reach.
More advanced analyses can visualize co-authorship networks, spotlight emerging research themes, and identify influential institutions. With platforms like Biblioshiny (2), VOSviewer, Google Scholar, and PubMed, MSLs can remain current and engage more effectively with thought leaders—even without access to proprietary tools.
How Bibliometric Tools Help MSLs Drive Patient-Centered and Strategic Impact
Publicly available bibliometric platforms empower both aspiring and established MSLs to understand the therapeutic landscape, identify key stakeholders, and align their efforts with strategic priorities. Whether preparing for interviews or executing in-field strategies, these tools support data-driven insights and informed engagement.
Identify Unmet Medical Needs
Bibliometric scans can uncover research gaps by comparing publication volume with disease prevalence. This helps MSLs prioritize efforts in regions where scientific attention is lacking—creating opportunities for impactful education and support.
Pinpoint Key Researchers and Institutions
Analyzing co-authorship and institutional trends enables MSLs to identify influential KOLs and academic centers. These insights guide meaningful, evidence-based engagement strategies in both established and underserved areas, helping MSLs bring scientific value where it’s needed most.
Inform Strategic Outreach and Regional Planning
Bibliometric analysis offers a data-driven approach to mapping scientific activity and identifying geographic gaps in research output. This method is especially valuable in high-impact therapeutic areas such as immuno-oncology. For instance, a scan of publication trends from 2010 to 2025 in the checkpoint inhibitor space—focused on PD-1/PD-L1 pathways—reveals that while coastal hubs dominate output, regions like Arizona remain underrepresented despite housing respected institutions such as the University of Arizona Cancer Center and Mayo Clinic Arizona, both of which contribute meaningfully to the literature.
By uncovering these disparities, bibliometrics can guide strategic planning for medical affairs. Understanding where research momentum is concentrated—and where it is not—helps MSLs prioritize outreach, strengthen engagement with local investigators, and tailor educational efforts to emerging or underserved regions.
Understand the Competitive and Therapeutic Landscape
Beyond geographic trends, bibliometric methods can illuminate shifts in the therapeutic and competitive landscape—highlighting emerging targets, evolving publication patterns, and changes in sponsor activity. While Merck and BMS continue to lead in checkpoint inhibitor research, companies like GSK, AstraZeneca, and Incyte are gaining visibility. These insights not only inform strategic engagement for MSLs in the field but also help candidates articulate a company’s pipeline strengths and position within the broader immuno-oncology space.
Prepare for MSL Interviews
For aspiring MSLs and those in transition, bibliometric insights offer a strategic edge. They can highlight a company’s key therapeutic focus areas, identify influential researchers in the field, and surface timely topics for discussion. Referencing these insights during interviews signals a proactive mindset and the ability to engage with scientific content in a way that aligns with medical affairs objectives.
Unlocking Strategic Insight Without Proprietary Tools
One of the biggest advantages of bibliometrics is accessibility. Free tools like Biblioshiny, VOSviewer, and Google Scholar offer low-cost access to insights that support both interview prep and in-role execution.
In the same scan of 244 PD-1/PD-L1-related publications (January 2010–June 2025), high activity was seen in NSCLC and melanoma, while fewer studies addressed gastric cancer and triple-negative breast cancer—MSLs can use such data to support inclusive outreach, engage underserved researchers, and advocate for equity in medical engagement.
These tools also reveal broader patterns—such as shifts in collaboration networks or institutional output—and help MSLs monitor publication growth aligned with clinical milestones. For example, checkpoint inhibitor literature surged between 2015 and 2021, paralleling key approvals for pembrolizumab and nivolumab.
Compliance Considerations and Small Company Opportunities
Once onboard, MSLs must follow their company’s internal policies regarding use of external tools. Most organizations provide access to proprietary platforms and set clear data privacy protocols. However, in startups or smaller biotech firms where paid platforms may be limited, publicly available tools can be valuable for insights and field strategy, with minimal overhead.
Case Example: PD-1/PD-L1 Bibliometric Insights (2010–2025)
A bibliometric scan using Biblioshiny of 244 checkpoint inhibitor publications yielded key insights:
- Publication Growth: Sharp rise from 2015–2021, aligned with key trial milestones.
- Top Journals: Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer, Clinical Cancer Research, Annals of Oncology.
- Leading US Institutions: UPMC Hillman Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, PA; Memorial Sloan Kettering Center, New York, NY
- Regional Opportunities: Arizona institutions contribute meaningfully but are underrepresented compared to coastal hubs, suggesting untapped potential.
- Emerging Themes: “Tumor microenvironment,” “immune resistance,” and “combination immunotherapy” are gaining traction.
These patterns can be visualized using co-authorship and keyword cluster maps, which in turn inform regional strategies, KOL identification, and therapeutic engagement.
Figure 1: Biblioshiny Visualizations of PD-1/PD-L1 Clinical Publications*
This figure shows visualizations from Biblioshiny, based on 244 PubMed-indexed clinical studies on PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors published from 2010 to mid-2025. (a) Annual Scientific Production: A rise in publications reflects growing clinical focus on checkpoint inhibitors. (b) Word Cloud: Common keywords highlight therapeutic themes such as antibodies, nivolumab, and combination chemotherapy. (c) Collaboration World Map: Strong international research networks center on the U.S., Europe, and East Asia. (d) Tree Map: Key research themes include patient age, tumor types, and immune checkpoint–related therapies.
*This figure reflects sample outputs from Biblioshiny and is not intended as a comprehensive or definitive landscape analysis
Conclusion
Whether you’re a job-seeking MSL preparing for interviews or an in-role MSL supporting strategic initiatives, bibliometric tools offer a reliable way to generate timely, actionable insights. They empower you to elevate scientific conversations, build equity into your outreach, and deliver patient-centered value without proprietary software. With the right mindset and tools, MSLs can stay sharp, relevant, and impactful at every stage of their journey.
Table 1: Overview of Publicly Available Bibliometric Tools
This table summarizes 10 publicly available bibliometric tools, highlighting their functionality for citation analysis, research trend detection, author and institution mapping, and collaboration network visualization. These platforms are beneficial for medical science liaisons seeking to generate insights without proprietary software, whether preparing for interviews, planning territory strategies, or supporting field engagement
| Tool Name | Description | URL |
| Bibliometrix/Biblioshiny | R-based platform and web app for full bibliometric analysis | https://www.bibliometrix.org |
| VOSviewer | Network visualization tool for mapping authors, keywords, and institutions | https://www.vosviewer.com |
| OpenAlex | Open-access scholarly metadata platform; API and search interface | https://openalex.org |
| Google Scholar | Academic search engine with basic citation metrics | https://scholar.google.com |
| Citespace | Java-based software for trend and cluster detection | http://cluster.cis.drexel.edu/~cchen/citespace/ |
| Sci2 Tool | Modular toolkit for multi-level bibliometric analysis | https://sci2.cns.iu.edu/user/index.php |
| Lens.org | Comprehensive patent and scholarly database with citation analysis tools | https://www.lens.org |
| Research Rabbit | Literature mapping and visualization tool with collaboration features | https://www.researchrabbit.ai |
| Dimensions.ai (free tier) | Freemium access to publication trends and metrics | https://www.dimensions.ai |
| Scopus Preview | Limited-access interface for author metrics and abstracts | https://www.scopus.com |
Reference
- Donthu, Naveen, et al. “How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines.” Journal of Business Research, vol. 133, 2021, pp. 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070.
- Aria, Massimo, and Corrado Cuccurullo. “bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis.” Journal of Informetrics, vol. 11, no. 4, 2017, pp. 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007.
About the author:
Tayo Fakunle PhD, MPH, MBA, MSL-BC
Tayo Fakunle is a seasoned Medical Science Liaison with a strong track record in pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device sectors. Most recently, she transitioned into oncology, bringing prior experience in respiratory, allergy and immunology, orthopedics, cell therapy, and regenerative medicine. Tayo is dedicated to building outcomes-driven relationships with healthcare professionals and academic institutions through evidence-based scientific dialogue, research support, and disease-state education. She is passionate about innovative approaches to professional development and education, grounded in her strong scientific and academic foundation.
Have an opinion on this article? Send a message to the editor.