Case reports and case series from Lancet had significant impact on medical literature

Joerg Albrecht, Alexander Meves, Michael Bigby

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

96 Scopus citations


Background and Objectives: Case reports and case series are often the first evidence of innovative treatment, but clinical trials need to follow to substantiate this evidence. The objective of this article was to evaluate case reports or case series describing innovative treatment concerning their impact. Methods: Case reports and case series (n ≤ 10) from a high-impact journal, The Lancet, published from 1 January 1996 to 30 June 1997, were evaluated according to predefined criteria. To assess publication impact, Pubmed, Science Citation Index, the Register of Current Controlled Clinical Trials, and the Cochrance Controlled Clinical Trials Register were searched. Results: Sixty-four case reports and 39 case series were identified. They were cited in average 17 times (median 6,5; range 0-336). Twenty-Four follow-up trials were identified, nine in the register of current controlled clinical trials. Conclusion: Case reports and case series can be well received, and have significant influence on subsequent literature and possibly on clinical practice. Many were followed by clinical trials. Often, though, they report rare conditions for which trials may not be feasible, and more or less explicitly transfer established treatment into other conditions. Overall, there is a strong publication bias favoring positive results, and opportunity should be created for publication of follow-up reports.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1227-1232
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Clinical Epidemiology
Issue number12
StatePublished - Dec 1 2005


  • Case reports
  • Case series
  • Clinical research
  • Clinical trials
  • Impact factor
  • Publication bias
  • Review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Epidemiology


Dive into the research topics of 'Case reports and case series from Lancet had significant impact on medical literature'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this