Notes regarding the next era for the Journal of Clinical Microbiology

Abstract

Full text

EDITORIAL

“All will benefit from the dissemination of the new knowledge and the valuable experiences reported by the devoted scientists, who proudly call themselves Clinical Microbiologists.”

This quote is from the front matter of the inaugural issue of the Journal of Clinical Microbiology (JCM), published on 1 January 1975. While short, the congratulatory message from Analytab Products Inc. to the American Society for Microbiology and future readers of the Journal of Clinical Microbiology inspires. Clinical microbiologists, physicians, patients, and the public have all benefited from the knowledge gleaned from publications in JCM over the first 50 years of its history. Examples of seminal works housed in our archives include the first description of pulsed-field gel electrophoresis for bacterial strain typing (1), which ushered in an era of molecular strain typing and revolutionized epidemiology and infection control. Boom and colleagues published their method for nucleic acid extraction using guanidinium thiocyanate and silica particles (2) in JCM in 1990. The Nugent scoring system for the diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis (3) and the first applications of PCR methods for the detection of influenza A (4), enterovirus (5), West Nile virus (6), dengue (7), Mycobacterium tuberculosis (8), and Staphylococcus aureus (9), among many other pathogens, were also published in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology. Clinical microbiology laboratories across the world use methods developed from the building blocks of these works, benefiting the care of countless patients. The journal has also highlighted important epidemiological findings, such as the emergence and spread of methicillin-resistant S. aureus with novel staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec type IV in the community (10), as well as the first description of the granulocytotropic rickettsial pathogen Anaplasma phagocytophilum (11) and vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus in U.S. hospitals (12). The works published in the Journal of Clinical Microbiology shaped our collective response to the COVID-19 pandemic, with an impressive 289 articles published over 3 years and over 19,500 citations (Dimensions database, https://app.dimensions.ai, accessed 27 August 2025). Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, methods to detect other viruses of pandemic potential, including novel swine origin influenza A (H1N1) (13, 14), Middle East respiratory syndrome (15), and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (16) were described in the journal.

The evolution of our field of clinical microbiology is well documented in our archives. At times, adapting to change has led to debate among colleagues, as new techniques and data challenged historical dogmas for the practice of laboratory medicine. The journal has become an important platform for this debate. Recent examples include our community’s grappling over how to best approach the inexorable tide of taxonomic updates for microorganisms of medical importance (17) or replacing traditional cultures with culture-independent tests (18–21).

Against this backdrop, it is my great honor to take on the role of Editor in Chief for the Journal of Clinical Microbiology. It is also a humbling and daunting prospect to lead the academic home for clinical microbiology. Dr. McAdam’s advice to me for the role he held for the last 10 years was to “be bold and make major change.” This is a rather intimidating directive, lessened only by the knowledge that the journal has grown and flourished under his direction and is in excellent shape. The Journal of Clinical Microbiology has become the premier journal for clinical microbiology and is among the top that publish microbiology content. The Editors and Editorial Board members recruited by Dr. McAdam are first-rate scientists and clinical microbiologists, and I have been continually impressed by their acumen and instinct; the excellent science published in the journal is fully attributed to their dedication and hard work. I am also supported by an amazing staff at ASM Journals—their patience with me as I fumbled through the first months in this role has been impressive. Through the collective wisdom of this group, the future of the Journal of Clinical Microbiology is starting to take shape.

First, the core mission of JCM will not change. Publication of the highest quality studies in clinical microbiology and educational content in the brief case, photo quiz, and minireview features are foundational to our efforts over the next 5–10 years. A key area of expansion is our global inclusivity, and we will be exploring strategies to publish diverse perspectives and data from countries and regions that are historically poorly represented in the journal. This will be accomplished through the addition of Editors and Editorial Board members from outside the United States, including the newly appointed Mark Nicol (The University of Western Australia). In addition and as promised (22), I am delighted that Dr. Elitza Theel has agreed to take on the role of Editor for Diagnostic Access and Equity and will oversee a new journal section under this same title. Articles published by the Journal of Clinical Microbiology are read by policymakers and standards developers, and it is imperative that the journal develop the means to ensure our content is equitable, as infectious disease is a global challenge that affects all humans. Diagnostic innovations outside North America and Europe, married with epidemiological and pragmatic studies from low- and middle-income countries, will enrich the journal. Dr. Theel’s research has focused on this work, and I am excited to see how she shapes this strategic item.

A criticism I have encountered for JCM, particularly during my time in industry, is a perceived lack of acceptance for industry-led publications in the journal. Development of journal features, such as the recent “innovative diagnostic methods,” has been a good step towards remedying this concern, although further clarification for this feature is needed. To this end, the scope of the journal has been revised slightly to better highlight the content we are interested in. Specifically, studies of interest include those that are early assessments of novel methods, but these must have sufficient data to demonstrate reasonable proof of concept. In addition, studies that evaluate the regulatory science, including standardization of reference methods, development of composite references, and novel mechanisms to perform clinical trials are welcome.

The widespread use of preprints was enhanced by the COVID-19 pandemic and has left some questioning the continued role of peer review and academic publishing (23). These individuals suggest journals become focused on content discovery by readers as much as content publication, a concept we will be exploring with the Journal of Clinical Microbiology. After all, the primary role of the academic journal is scientific communication—increased frequency for the Editors in Conversation podcast, editorials, and commentaries are planned. In addition, expansion of collated article collections will occur.

Finally, expansion of the journal’s content while maintaining the highest standards is a key strategic imperative. New additions to the scope of JCM, all effective as of this publication, include:

–Studies that evaluate equitable approaches to diagnostic testing across diverse populations and geographies, including pathogens that disproportionately affect underserved populations and diagnostic innovations designed to serve low-resource or remote settings.–Studies that evaluate the characteristics and clinical impact of specific microorganisms as they relate to laboratory testing, including emerging pathogens, antimicrobial susceptibility profiles, and the pathogen’s impact on specific populations.–Expansion of epidemiology studies to beyond just those that describe novel laboratory methods for epidemiological evaluations.

This past year has undoubtedly been challenging for science and academic medicine. Access to medical misinformation is high, and anti-science sentiments are pervasive. Poorly conducted or fraudulent studies are being used to justify political means (24). The work we do is challenging, often underfunded, and almost always eked out on evenings and weekends or rare breaks in busy clinical schedules. Nonetheless, I call on clinical microbiologists to persevere. Observation, experimentation, and importantly, publication of your findings lead to real change for patients and public health, globally, and are the best weapon we have in these challenging times.