The Lancet Infectious Diseases (LANCET INFECT DIS)
A lively monthly journal of review, opinion, and news covering international issues relevant to infectious disease specialists worldwide.
- Impact factor17.39Show impact factor historyHide impact factor history
- WebsiteLancet Infectious Diseases, The website
Other titlesLancet infectious diseases (Online), Infectious diseases
Material typePeriodical, Internet resource
Document typeInternet Resource, Computer File, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper
- Author can archive a pre-print version
- Author can archive a post-print version
- Voluntary deposit by author of pre-print allowed on Institutions open scholarly website and pre-print servers
- Voluntary deposit by author of authors post-print allowed on institutions open scholarly website including Institutional Repository
- Deposit due to Funding Body, Institutional and Governmental mandate only allowed where separate agreement between repository and publisher exists
- Set statement to accompany deposit
- Published source must be acknowledged
- Must link to journal home page or articles' DOI
- Publisher's version/PDF cannot be used
- Articles in some journals can be made Open Access on payment of additional charge
- NIH Authors articles will be submitted to PMC after 12 months
- Authors who are required to deposit in subject repositories may also use Sponsorship Option
- Pre-print can not be deposited for The Lancet
Publications in this journal
Article: Uninfected but not unaffected: chronic maternal infections during pregnancy, fetal immunity, and susceptibility to postnatal infections.The Lancet Infectious Diseases 02/2012;
Article: Chronic unilateral conjunctivitisThe Lancet Infectious Diseases 01/2012; 12(4):354.
The Lancet Infectious Diseases 06/2009; 9(5):265.
The Lancet Infectious Diseases 06/2009; 9(5):270-1.
The Lancet Infectious Diseases 05/2009; 9(4):208.
The Lancet Infectious Diseases 05/2009; 9(4):205-6.
Article: Safe surgery prevents infection.The Lancet Infectious Diseases 05/2009; 9(4):203.
The Lancet Infectious Diseases 04/2009; 9(3):144-5.
Article: Treatment outcomes among patients with multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: systematic review and meta-analysis.[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis is a growing clinical and public-health concern. To evaluate existing evidence regarding treatment regimens for MDR tuberculosis, we used a Bayesian random-effects meta-analysis of the available therapeutic studies to assess how the reported proportion of patients treated successfully is influenced by differences in treatment regimen design, study methodology, and patient population. Successful treatment outcome was defined as cure or treatment completion. 34 clinical reports with a mean of 250 patients per report met the inclusion criteria. Our analysis shows that the proportion of patients treated successfully improved when treatment duration was at least 18 months, and if patients received directly observed therapy throughout treatment. Studies that combined both factors had significantly higher pooled success proportions (69%, 95% credible interval [CI] 64-73%) than other studies of treatment outcomes (58%, 95% CI 52-64%). Individualised treatment regimens had higher treatment success (64%, 95% CI 59-68%) than standardised regimens (54%, 95% CI 43-68%), although the difference was not significant. Treatment approaches and study methodologies were heterogeneous across studies. Many important variables, including patients' HIV status, were inconsistently reported between studies. These results underscore the importance of strong patient support and treatment follow-up systems to develop successful MDR tuberculosis treatment programmes.The Lancet Infectious Diseases 04/2009; 9(3):153-61.
Article: Approaches to tuberculosis screening and diagnosis in people with HIV in resource-limited settings.[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Tuberculosis is the main cause of morbidity and mortality in people living with HIV/AIDS worldwide. Early diagnosis and treatment is essential to addressing the dual epidemic of tuberculosis and HIV. Increasing recognition of the importance of integrating tuberculosis services--including screening--into HIV care has led to global policies and the beginnings of implementation of joint activities at the national level. However, debate remains about the best methods of screening for pulmonary tuberculosis among people living with HIV/AIDS in resource-limited settings. Mycobacterial culture, the gold standard for tuberculosis diagnosis, is too slow and complex to be a useful screening test in such settings. More widely available methods, such as symptom screening, sputum smear microscopy, chest radiography, and tuberculin skin testing have important shortcomings, especially in people living with HIV/AIDS. However, until simpler, cheaper, and more sensitive diagnostics for tuberculosis are available in peripheral healthcare settings, a strategy must be developed that uses current evidence to combine available screening tools.The Lancet Infectious Diseases 04/2009; 9(3):173-84.
The Lancet Infectious Diseases 04/2009; 9(3):137.
Article: Reflections on the white plague.[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Tuberculosis continues to be one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality from infectious disease worldwide. When WHO declared tuberculosis a global emergency in 1993, the initial response from the international community was sluggish and inadequate. A resurgence of the disease, the emergence of multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant strains, and the detrimental effect of the concurrent tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS epidemics on national control programmes in sub-Saharan Africa have all occurred despite the availability of effective combination treatment regimens. On the positive side, funding agencies and donor governments are at long last taking a serious interest in investing in tuberculosis research priorities defined by the Stop TB Partnership. Although this investment introduces optimism for eventual control of the White Plague, past failures remind us not to be complacent.The Lancet Infectious Diseases 04/2009; 9(3):197-202.
The Lancet Infectious Diseases 04/2009; 9(3):141-2.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: WHO recommendations for early antimicrobial treatment of childhood pneumonia have been effective in reducing childhood mortality, but the last major revision was over 10 years ago. The emergence of antimicrobial resistance, new pneumonia pathogens, and new drugs have prompted WHO to assemble an international panel to review the literature on childhood pneumonia and to develop evidence-based recommendations for the empirical treatment of non-severe pneumonia among children managed by first-level health providers. Treatment should target the bacterial causes most likely to lead to severe disease, including Streptoccocus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae. The best first-line agent is amoxicillin, given twice daily for 3-5 days, although co-trimoxazole may be an alternative in some settings. Treatment failure should be defined in a child who develops signs warranting immediate referral or who does not have a decrease in respiratory rate after 48-72 h of therapy. If failure occurs, and no indication for immediate referral exists, possible explanations for failure should be systematically determined, including non-adherence to therapy and alternative diagnoses. If failure of the first-line agent remains a possible explanation, suitable second-line agents include high-dose amoxicillin-clavulanic acid with or without an affordable macrolide for children over 3 years of age.The Lancet Infectious Diseases 04/2009; 9(3):185-96.
The Lancet Infectious Diseases 04/2009; 9(3):139-40.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.
Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins
ISSN: 1944-7884, Impact factor: 4.43
American Society for Nutrition;...
ISSN: 1938-3207, Impact factor: 6.67
Public Library of Science, Public...
ISSN: 1932-6203, Impact factor: 4.09
ISSN: 1879-0631, Impact factor: 2.56
ISSN: 1879-0046, Impact factor: 3.6
ISSN: 1873-4758, Impact factor: 2.54
Public Health Association of...
ISSN: 1753-6405, Impact factor: 1.2
ISSN: 1746-6318, Impact factor: 4.75