For adult dermatology publication trends (Table 3), there was a significant increase in total number of publications (R2=0.4975, P=0.0227), meta-analyses (R2=0.8319, P=0.0002), randomized controlled trials (R2=0.4600, P=0.0311), reviews (R2=0.5699, P=0.0116) and systematic reviews (R2=0.9191, P<.0001). For pediatric dermatology publication trends (Table 4), there was a significant increase in total number of publications (R2=0.4499, P=0.0337), letters (R2=0.4164, P=0.0439), meta-analyses (R2=5656, P=0.0121), practice guidelines (R2=0.5911, P=0.0094) and systematic reviews (R2=0.8211, P=0.0003). By analyzing frequencies, case reports continue to make up the largest percentage of published data in dermatology; by summing up all publications across the years, case reports make up 37.4% of adult publications and 30% of pediatric publications. Figure 1 shows the correlation between the total number of adult and pediatric dermatology publications.
DISCUSSION
Mimouni et al examined trends in adult and pediatric dermatology publications for 15 years (1993–2007) and found that there was an increase in total number of publications, randomized controlled trials, clinical trials, case reports, and letters to the editors across the years.1 The regression analysis for meta-analyses, editorials, and practice guidelines in the original article was limited due to the low number of publications.1 In comparing the quality of the published work, the fastest rate of increase reported in Mimouni et al was for publications with a higher level of evidence such as clinical trials and randomized controlled trials while articles with a lower level of evidence such as letters to the editors and case reports had a slower rate of increase or no change.1
Our analysis for the next 10 years (2008–2017) showed a similar significant increase for both adult and pediatric dermatology in the total number of publications. In adult dermatology, similar to what was found in Mimouni et al, there was a significant increase in randomized controlled trials. However, new trends include a significant increase in reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis. In pediatric dermatology, new trends include the statistically significant increase in meta-analyses, practice guidelines, and systematic reviews. The statistically significant increase previously observed in 1993–2007 in clinical trials, case reports, and pediatric randomized controlled trials was lost in the 2008–2017 data. As was observed in Mimouni et al, case reports continued to make up the largest percentage of publications in 2008–2017. This may be attributed to the relatively low number of FDA-approved treatments for dermatologic conditions, necessitating the need for case reports to discover off-label therapeutic options. Further, case reports are necessary in understanding new disease entities or novel treatments and can serve to stimulate further research thus, our results confirm the utility of case reports in dermatology.
The field of dermatology has expanded for the last 25 years. Examining trends in adult and pediatric publications can help dermatologists understand the current state of research in the field. It can also aid in pointing researchers to areas that need further investigation and development, like pediatric randomized controlled trials. The increase in meta-analyses and practice guidelines is promising and we hope it continues to empower the field of dermatology.
Some limitations in this study include ones originally mentioned in Mimouni et al regarding the overlap between pediatric and adult publications that can’t be differentiated in MEDLINE, the default categorization of MEDLINE that may not be accurate, and the inability of MEDLINE to include absolutely all articles in dermatology. As discussed in Mimouni et al, we do not
Our analysis for the next 10 years (2008–2017) showed a similar significant increase for both adult and pediatric dermatology in the total number of publications. In adult dermatology, similar to what was found in Mimouni et al, there was a significant increase in randomized controlled trials. However, new trends include a significant increase in reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis. In pediatric dermatology, new trends include the statistically significant increase in meta-analyses, practice guidelines, and systematic reviews. The statistically significant increase previously observed in 1993–2007 in clinical trials, case reports, and pediatric randomized controlled trials was lost in the 2008–2017 data. As was observed in Mimouni et al, case reports continued to make up the largest percentage of publications in 2008–2017. This may be attributed to the relatively low number of FDA-approved treatments for dermatologic conditions, necessitating the need for case reports to discover off-label therapeutic options. Further, case reports are necessary in understanding new disease entities or novel treatments and can serve to stimulate further research thus, our results confirm the utility of case reports in dermatology.
The field of dermatology has expanded for the last 25 years. Examining trends in adult and pediatric publications can help dermatologists understand the current state of research in the field. It can also aid in pointing researchers to areas that need further investigation and development, like pediatric randomized controlled trials. The increase in meta-analyses and practice guidelines is promising and we hope it continues to empower the field of dermatology.
Some limitations in this study include ones originally mentioned in Mimouni et al regarding the overlap between pediatric and adult publications that can’t be differentiated in MEDLINE, the default categorization of MEDLINE that may not be accurate, and the inability of MEDLINE to include absolutely all articles in dermatology. As discussed in Mimouni et al, we do not
