Nous avons vu hier la stratégie de PLOS qui joue sur les volumes (et le chiffre d’affaires) et maintenant la stratégie de l'un des 7 Lancet qui joue sur la qualité (et les profits je suppose). Cet édito anonyme du numéro de septembre 2013 explique que pendant 9 ans The Lancet Infectious DIseases n’a publié que des revues générales. Bilan : "In 2012, the journal published 43 research articles—of which 15 were randomised controlled trials and 12 were meta-analyses—and 37 reviews; in 2013 the corresponding numbers will be 50 and 36". Actuellement le taux d'acceptation de 7 % est jugé bas, et la rédaction pense augmenter le nombre d'articles publiés. Facteur d'impact : 19,97…
Je cite aussi "In common with all The Lancet journals, The Lancet Infectious Diseases prefers to publish research findings that have a direct bearing on the care of patients. We favour studies that are first in human or provide definitive answers to clinical questions—ie, that are likely to change practice or thinking. We believe that protocol-driven intervention studies, particularly randomised controlled trials, provide the highest level of evidence. Meta-analysis is also a powerful means to address unresolved clinical issues. Evaluations of diagnostic tests are unlikely to be considered unless they involve samples collected prospectively and specifically for the purpose and include comparison against a gold standard. Other study designs that are unlikely to be considered include retrospective data collection, uncontrolled or historical controls, in vitro or animal models, and case reports or single-centre case series."
