Writing scientific case reports for top‐line journals. Issue 3 (29th December 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Weinstein, Robert
• Is Part Of: Journal of clinical apheresis. Volume 36:Issue 3(2021)
• Page Start: 465
• Page End: 469
• Publication Date: 2020-12-29
• Subjects: academic medicine -- clinical hypothesis -- manuscript writing -- McLeod criteria -- publication; Hemapheresis -- Periodicals; Blood -- Transfusion -- Periodicals; Blood -- Transfusion, Autologous -- Periodicals; Cell separation -- Periodicals; Leukapheresis -- Periodicals; Plasmapheresis -- Periodicals; 615.39
• DOI: 10.1002/jca.21869
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0733-2459

Abstract

Abstract: The venerable clinical case report has been largely reduced to the status of commodity in the present age of dedicated case report journals. Top‐line clinical journals may discourage or even refuse to accept clinical case reports due to their potential adverse effect on the impact factor of the journal. But while the traditional clinical case report, that presents a case history and attempts to extrapolate a lesson from it, may have fallen out of favor, there remains a need for astute clinical observations that serve to stimulate the generation of hypotheses and may lead, ultimately, to medical breakthroughs. Clinicians are very much capable of employing scientific reasoning when approaching an unusual clinical situation. By remaining up to date with the literature, and determining, at the outset of the case, what lessons may be learned from it, they can formulate a scientific approach, using clinical methods, to result in meaningful contributions to the literature in top‐line journals.