Multi-Omics Research Trends in Sepsis: A Bibliometric, Comparative Analysis Between the United States, the European Union 28 Member States, and China.

"-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.

[1]  Pierre Azoulay,et al.  Public R&D Investments and Private-Sector Patenting: Evidence from NIH Funding Rules , 2015, The Review of economic studies.

[2]  R. Ziegelstein Personomics: The Missing Link in the Evolution from Precision Medicine to Personalized Medicine , 2017, Journal of personalized medicine.

[3]  K. Vaesen,et al.  How much would each researcher receive if competitive government research funding were distributed equally among researchers? , 2017, PloS one.

[4]  Niranjan Kissoon,et al.  Recognizing Sepsis as a Global Health Priority - A WHO Resolution. , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  Fiona Godlee,et al.  Data Sharing Statements for Clinical Trials: A Requirement of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. , 2017, JAMA.

[6]  H. Wong,et al.  Early Diagnosis of Sepsis: Is an Integrated Omics Approach the Way Forward? , 2017, Molecular Diagnosis & Therapy.

[7]  Fiona Godlee,et al.  Data Sharing Statements for Clinical Trials: A Requirement of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors , 2017, Journal of Korean medical science.

[8]  Guohao Xie,et al.  China's growing contribution to sepsis research from 1984 to 2014 , 2017, Medicine.

[9]  I. Katz,et al.  Scientific Drought, Golden Eggs, and Global Leadership - Why Trump's NIH Funding Cuts Would Be a Disaster. , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[10]  G. Patrinos,et al.  Performance Ratio Based Resource Allocation Decision-Making in Genomic Medicine. , 2017, Omics : a journal of integrative biology.

[11]  K. Birch Rethinking Value in the Bio-economy , 2016, Science, technology & human values.

[12]  Xiaoli Tang,et al.  The performance of China’s biomedical innovation: a scientometric analysis , 2016, Science China Life Sciences.

[13]  P. Khatri,et al.  Robust classification of bacterial and viral infections via integrated host gene expression diagnostics , 2016, Science Translational Medicine.

[14]  A. Brand,et al.  Public Health Genomics: the essential part for good governance in public health , 2016, International Journal of Public Health.

[15]  Christopher W Seymour,et al.  Developing a New Definition and Assessing New Clinical Criteria for Septic Shock: For the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). , 2016, JAMA.

[16]  Joerg M. Buescher,et al.  Integration of omics: more than the sum of its parts , 2016, Cancer & Metabolism.

[17]  B. Chain,et al.  The sequence of sequencers: The history of sequencing DNA , 2016, Genomics.

[18]  E. Dorsey,et al.  The anatomy of medical research: US and international comparisons. , 2015, JAMA.

[19]  G. Jiménez-Sánchez,et al.  Omics and the bioeconomy , 2015, EMBO reports.

[20]  Investing in sepsis research: systematic analysis of UK public and philanthropic funding 1997–2010 , 2014, JRSM open.

[21]  David Gomez-Cabrero,et al.  Data integration in the era of omics: current and future challenges , 2014, BMC Systems Biology.

[22]  M. Kompier,et al.  Cause and effect: Optimizing the designs of longitudinal studies in occupational health psychology , 2014 .

[23]  E. Hafen,et al.  Health Data Cooperatives – Citizen Empowerment , 2014, Methods of Information in Medicine.

[24]  Barbara Sitek,et al.  A practical data processing workflow for multi-OMICS projects. , 2014, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[25]  M. Bhasin,et al.  Bench-to-bedside review: Future novel diagnostics for sepsis - a systems biology approach , 2013, Critical Care.

[26]  A. Kesselheim,et al.  Gene patenting--the Supreme Court finally speaks. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[27]  A. Heck,et al.  Next-generation proteomics: towards an integrative view of proteome dynamics , 2012, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[28]  M. Rodwin,et al.  Clinical trial data as a public good. , 2012, JAMA.

[29]  S. Yadav,et al.  Patents in the era of genomics: an overview. , 2012, Recent patents on DNA & gene sequences.

[30]  S. Ebrahim,et al.  Epigenetics: the next big thing. , 2012, International journal of epidemiology.

[31]  S. Omholt,et al.  Phenomics: the next challenge , 2010, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[32]  F. Collins Has the revolution arrived? , 2010, Nature.

[33]  Robert E. Ployhart,et al.  Longitudinal Research: The Theory, Design, and Analysis of Change , 2010 .

[34]  Ian D. Wilson,et al.  Metabolic Phenotyping in Health and Disease , 2008, Cell.

[35]  G. Dosi,et al.  The relationships between science, technologies and their industrial exploitation: An illustration through the myths and realities of the so-called ‘European Paradox’ , 2006 .

[36]  Gary P. Pisano,et al.  Science Business: The Promise, the Reality, and the Future of Biotech , 2006 .

[37]  J. Loscalzo The NIH budget and the future of biomedical research. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[38]  B. Palsson,et al.  The model organism as a system: integrating 'omics' data sets , 2006, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[39]  Marc H V Van Regenmortel,et al.  Reductionism and complexity in molecular biology. Scientists now have the tools to unravel biological and overcome the limitations of reductionism. , 2004, EMBO reports.

[40]  H. Varmus Getting ready for gene-based medicine. , 2002, The New England journal of medicine.

[41]  Jaegwon Kim,et al.  Making Sense of Emergence , 1999 .

[42]  T. Kuhn The structure of scientific revolutions, 3rd ed. , 1996 .