Editor Guidelines

Standards and expectations for the JCCI Editorial Board.

JCCI publishes clinically meaningful case reports, case series, technical notes, and image based submissions that support diagnosis, patient safety, and clinical learning. Editors are expected to uphold this mission by prioritizing submissions that demonstrate clear learning value, sound clinical reasoning, and responsible patient reporting.

The journal welcomes case reports across all medical and surgical specialties, with an emphasis on rare presentations, innovative diagnostic approaches, and practical treatment insights. Editorial decisions should reflect clinical impact and the potential to improve patient outcomes or professional education.

The first editorial screen determines scope fit, ethical readiness, and baseline reporting quality. Submissions that fail to meet essential requirements should be returned for revision or declined to protect reviewer time.

• Is the manuscript clearly within the scope of clinical case reports or images?
• Does the report provide a distinct learning point or diagnostic insight?
• Are patient consent and ethical statements documented?
• Is the writing clear enough for peer review and clinical interpretation?
• Are images legible, properly labeled, and relevant to the case narrative?

Editors should evaluate whether the case report includes a clear clinical timeline, appropriate diagnostics, and meaningful outcomes. Reports should avoid anecdotal conclusions and instead link findings to clinical reasoning and published literature.

• Complete patient history, examination, investigation, and management details.
• Outcome and follow up information that demonstrate clinical relevance.
• Balanced discussion that acknowledges limitations and alternative explanations.
• Evidence based conclusions that align with the data presented.

Case series and technical notes require additional scrutiny because they often inform practice patterns. Editors should confirm that series include a coherent methodology and that technical notes are reproducible and safe.

• Case series should include consistent inclusion criteria and a clear summary of outcomes.
• Technical notes should describe steps, equipment, and safety considerations in sufficient detail.
• Novel techniques should be framed with appropriate caution and limitations.

Images are a core component of JCCI. Editors should ensure that image submissions provide context and teaching value in addition to visual quality. Supplementary files should add meaning, not redundancy.

• Confirm that annotations, arrows, or labels are accurate and clinically appropriate.
• Ensure that image captions explain the diagnostic significance clearly.
• Request additional views or magnification if the clinical feature is not evident.

JCCI places high value on clinical images. Editors should confirm that images are high resolution, appropriately annotated, and essential to the learning point. Any concern about manipulation should be addressed before peer review.

• Images meet resolution requirements and are free of excessive compression.
• Legends clearly explain what the image shows and its clinical significance.
• De-identification is complete and patient privacy is protected.
• Image adjustments are limited to clarity and do not alter clinical meaning.

Editors should verify that the clinical narrative is internally consistent and that data are presented accurately. Discrepancies between text, tables, and images should be addressed early. If automated tools or AI assisted analysis are used, authors must disclose usage and remain responsible for accuracy.

• Check for inconsistencies in timelines, measurements, or outcomes.
• Ensure figures and tables match the reported clinical narrative.
• Report suspected plagiarism or image duplication through COPE procedures.

Case reports often involve identifiable patient information. Editors must confirm that informed consent has been obtained for publication of clinical details and images. If consent is not possible, authors must explain the reason and ensure that no identifying information is included.

• Consent statements are included in the manuscript.
• Ethics approvals are provided when required by local policy.
• Conflicts of interest and funding statements are disclosed.

Editors should encourage authors to follow established reporting guidelines to improve transparency and quality. The CARE checklist is recommended for case reports, and image based submissions should provide structured captions and context.

• CARE guidelines for case reports and case series.
• Structured abstracts where required.
• Clear references with appropriate citation format.

Editors are responsible for selecting reviewers with appropriate clinical expertise and maintaining a fair, constructive review process. JCCI uses single-blind peer review, and reviewers should focus on clinical relevance, accuracy, and educational value.

• Select reviewers with direct expertise in the case topic or imaging modality.
• Monitor review quality and request clarification when needed.
• Ensure reviewer feedback remains respectful and actionable.

Most submissions require revision. Editors should evaluate whether authors addressed each comment and whether changes improve clarity and clinical relevance. If major concerns remain, additional review may be required.

• Confirm that revisions improve clinical interpretation and learning value.
• Check that new figures or data are consistent with the revised narrative.
• Request clarification when responses do not address reviewer concerns.

Editorial decisions should be transparent, consistent, and evidence based. Editors must balance novelty with rigor and avoid overreliance on prestige or institutional affiliation. Decisions should include clear rationale and guidance for revision.

• Accept when the case offers clear learning value and is well reported.
• Request revisions when improvements can strengthen clarity or ethics reporting.
• Reject when the case lacks novelty, ethical compliance, or clinical relevance.

Editors should be aware of unconscious bias and ensure that submissions are judged solely on clinical merit. Reports from resource limited settings can be highly valuable and should not be disadvantaged by institution type or regional context.

• Evaluate evidence rather than author affiliation or geography.
• Consider the clinical importance of cases from underserved populations.
• Encourage balanced citation of global literature.

Editors must protect confidentiality throughout the review process and avoid conflicts of interest. If an editor has personal, financial, or institutional conflicts with a submission, the manuscript should be reassigned.

• Maintain strict confidentiality of unpublished content.
• Recuse when conflicts could influence decision making.
• Ensure reviewers declare conflicts and remain impartial.

Editors should handle appeals respectfully and base decisions on documented evidence. Post publication corrections or retractions must follow COPE guidance and be handled promptly to protect the scientific record.

Editors are encouraged to guide authors toward better reporting practices. When language clarity limits clinical interpretation, recommend professional editing and point authors to the Language Editing Service. Encourage authors to review the Instructions for Author for formatting and ethics requirements.

JCCI tracks editorial turnaround times, review quality, and author feedback to improve the submission experience. Editors are encouraged to reflect on decision consistency, reviewer engagement, and the clarity of communication with authors. Sharing lessons learned strengthens the journals ability to publish reliable case based evidence.

• Support consistent timelines from submission to first decision.
• Encourage reviewer accountability and constructive feedback.
• Identify opportunities to improve reporting clarity and image quality.

Editors should aim for timely initial screening, responsive communication, and consistent decision quality. Document key decisions and maintain confidentiality throughout the process. The goal is to protect scientific integrity while helping strong case reports reach publication efficiently.

Last updated: January 2026.