The overblown, somewhat dramatic media interpretation of microbiota-gut-brain literature is highly misleading. This phenomenon is not new to neuroscience, wherein rapidly evolving research fields struggle to translate findings into clinical practice. Advances in microbiology might integrate our understanding of complex biological pathways that should be interpreted within neuropsychiatric symptom dimensions rather than specific disorders.

Citation-based metrics are increasingly used as a proxy to define representative, considerable, or significant papers. We challenge this belief by taking into account factors that may play a role in providing citations to a manuscript and whether/how those highly cited studies could shape a scientific field. A different approach to summarisation of relevant core publications within a topic is proposed.