key: cord-0707178-9kkylvfa
authors: Raoult, Didier
title: What is hot in infectious diseases?
date: 2015-06-05
journal: Clin Microbiol Infect
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2015.05.037
sha: cb09ade223b6a30c071c9638485ddba9c37587af
doc_id: 707178
cord_uid: 9kkylvfa

nan

Paper citation is currently the only way to evaluate what is 'hot' in international literature. To evaluate this using adapted keywords, we retrieved all articles, in early May 2015, that were cited more than 100 times according to ISI from Thomson Reuters, in infectious disease. We selected articles from the New England Journal of Medicine, the Lancet and the Journal of the American Medical Association as the most cited medical journals and from the Lancet Infectious Disease, Clinical Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology and Infections from the years 2012 and 2013, as the three, broad-spectrum, most cited, infectious diseases journals. During these years, more than 100 000 papers on infectious diseases were recorded in ISI, of which 200 were cited more than 100 times (0.2%). Among the three big medical journals, the citation rate (for all articles and reviews) was higher in the New England Journal of Medicine with average citation rate of 97, with 234 papers above 100 citations of which 27 were from infectious diseases (4% of papers published in the journal). For the Lancet 133 papers were recorded, 15 of which were from our field (1% of published papers), compared with 51 with four from our field in the Journal of the American Medical Association. Indeed, the New England Journal of Medicine for these 2 years published significantly more highly cited papers in our field. As for the infectious diseases journals, Lancet Infectious Disease did better: 12 (7%) of its articles reached 100 citations, nearly as many as the Lancet, its mother journal; Clinical Infectious Diseases had six articles and Clinical Microbiology and Infection had four and they were comparable within the infectious diseases field (see Table 1 ).

Three major points emerged. First, the microbiota in the international literature reach 35% of most cited papers but its appearance is negligible in infectious diseases journals and the best medical journals. In Clinical Microbiology and Infection, edited by F. Baquero, we published a supplementary issue [1] and I edited a themed issue [2] to emphasize this field. It is rapidly growing with most highly cited papers being issued from the Nature group (29) and Science (13), but this subject is sadly escaping the infectious disease and general medical literature. In contrast, attention paid to rare and regional diseases such as avian influenza virus H7N9 or Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus was very low in infectious diseases journals We recently reported on the disproportion of highly cited papers on regional diseases in leading journals, not being practical when considering their readership as doctors [3] . Finally, antibiotic resistance and evaluation of treatments and new antibiotic compounds are comparable in the journal literature (13%) and in infectious disease journals (16%) but are neglected in leading medical journals (2%). The 'big three' diseases (tuberculosis, human immunodeficiency virus infection and malaria) are equally published (30% in all sources), although malaria is neglected, considering the fatalities that it causes in the world. Finally, pneumonia (besides rare emerging viruses) and diarrhoeas are the more neglected field in all journals when considering their occurrence.

The microbiome as a human organ

It is about time physicians and clinical microbiologists in infectious diseases investigated the aetiology of obesity

Emerging respiratory viruses: is it 'much ado about nothing'? (Shakespeare)