1 Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT), Maastricht University , Maastricht, The Netherlands .
2 Intensive Care Medicine Unit, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Allergology and Sleep Medicine, Paracelsus Medical University (PMU) , Nuremberg, Germany .
OMICS. 2018 Mar;22(3):190-197. doi: 10.1089/omi.2017.0192.
"-Omics" research is in transition with the recent rise of multi-omics technology platforms. Integration of "-omics" and multi-omics research is of high priority in sepsis, a heterogeneous syndrome that is widely recognized as a global health burden and a priority biomedical funding field. We report here an original study on bibliometric trends in the use of "-omics" technologies, and multi-omics approaches in particular, in sepsis research in three (supra)national settings, the United States, the European Union 28 Member States (EU-28), and China. Using a 5-year longitudinal bibliometric study design from 2011 to 2015, we analyzed the sepsis-related research articles in English language that included at least one or multi-omics technologies in publicly available form in Medline (free full texts). We found that the United States has had the lead (almost one-third of publications) in the inclusion of an "-omics" or multi-omics technology in sepsis within the study period. However, both China and the EU-28 displayed a significant increase in the number of publications that employed one or more types of "-omics" research (p < 0.005), while the EU-28 displayed a significant increase especially in multi-omics research articles in sepsis (p < 0.05). Notably, more than half of the multi-omics research studies in the sepsis knowledge domain had a university or government/state funding source. Among the multi-omics research publications in sepsis, the combination of genomics and transcriptomics was the most frequent (40.5%), followed by genomics and proteomics (20.4%). We suggest that the lead of the United States in the field of "-omics" and multi-omics research in sepsis is likely at stake, with both the EU-28 and China rapidly increasing their research capacity. Moreover, "triple omics" that combine genomics, proteomics, and metabolomics analyses appear to be uncommon in sepsis, and yet much needed for triangulation of systems science data. These observations have implications for "-omics" technology policy and global research funding strategic foresight.
-“组学”研究正在随着多组学技术平台的兴起而发生转变。在脓毒症这一广泛被认为是全球健康负担和优先生物医学资助领域的异质综合征中,整合“组学”和多组学研究是当务之急。我们在此报告了一项关于在三个(超)国家环境中,即美国、欧盟 28 个成员国(EU-28)和中国,使用“组学”技术,特别是多组学方法进行脓毒症研究的文献计量学趋势的原始研究。我们采用了 2011 年至 2015 年的 5 年纵向文献计量学研究设计,分析了在 Medline(免费全文)中以英文发表的、至少包含一种“组学”或多组学技术的脓毒症相关研究文章。我们发现,在研究期间,美国在纳入脓毒症“组学”或多组学技术的研究中一直处于领先地位(近三分之一的出版物)。然而,中国和 EU-28 在使用一种或多种类型“组学”研究的出版物数量上都显示出显著增加(p<0.005),而 EU-28 尤其在脓毒症多组学研究文章方面显示出显著增加(p<0.05)。值得注意的是,脓毒症知识领域的多组学研究中有一半以上的研究有大学或政府/州的资金来源。在脓毒症的多组学研究出版物中,基因组学和转录组学的组合最为常见(40.5%),其次是基因组学和蛋白质组学(20.4%)。我们认为,美国在脓毒症“组学”和多组学研究领域的领先地位可能受到威胁,EU-28 和中国正在迅速增加其研究能力。此外,结合基因组学、蛋白质组学和代谢组学分析的“三重组学”在脓毒症中似乎并不常见,但对于系统科学数据的三角测量非常必要。这些观察结果对“组学”技术政策和全球研究资金战略规划具有重要意义。