Journal of Clinical Case Reports and ImagesEditorial Policies
Editorial policies
The standards governing peer review, patient protection, authorship, clinical-image integrity, editorial conflicts and changes to the published record.
Editorial independence and peer review
JCCI evaluates Case Reports, Clinical Images, Case Series and Technical Notes anchored to documented patient care across medical, surgical and allied clinical specialties. Interdisciplinary cases are eligible when the clinical record remains central. Peer review: Single-blind by default; double-blind review is available on request. All submissions undergo initial editorial screening. Manuscripts that meet the journal's scope and minimum requirements proceed to independent peer review. Manuscripts that proceed to external peer review are normally evaluated by at least two independent subject-matter experts. Editorial decisions are based on scope, scientific quality, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, reporting quality, and relevance to the journal.
Decisions are independent of article processing charges, waiver requests, institutional affiliation, geography, editorial membership or reviewer service. Payment becomes relevant only after acceptance and does not buy faster, preferential or more favorable review.
Authorship, originality and AI use
- Authorship
- Every listed author must have made an accountable contribution, approve the submitted version and accept responsibility for the work. Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged.
- Originality
- Submissions must be original, properly attribute prior work and must not be under consideration by another journal. Related reports, conference abstracts and preprints should be disclosed.
- AI tools
- An AI system cannot be an author. Authors must disclose material use of generative or analytical AI, verify all output and remain responsible for accuracy, attribution, privacy and originality.
Consent, privacy and human-subject ethics
Authors obtain written informed consent from the patient for publication of the case details and images and include a patient consent statement in the manuscript. Patient-identifiable images and recordings require explicit consent for publication. De-identification alone does not grant permission to publish.
Names, record numbers, full dates of birth, institutional identifiers and equivalent details must be removed from text, figures and embedded image metadata. If consent cannot be obtained, authors must explain the circumstances to the editorial office before proceeding. Any exception requires assessment under the journal's policies, applicable law and institutional requirements. Removing identifiers does not automatically remove the need for consent.
Research ethics committee or institutional review board approval must be reported where required. Authors should not use one jurisdiction's privacy law as a substitute for the requirements applying where care or research took place.
Confidential consent verification
The manuscript supplied to reviewers must contain the consent statement, not the signed consent form. Signed consent material is handled only by authorized editorial personnel through the agreed confidential channel and must not be circulated to reviewers or included in public supplementary files.
The handling editor confirms written-consent status and addresses any exception. Reviewers flag missing or inconsistent statements and visible identifiers; they do not receive sensitive signed consent material.
Data, reporting and clinical-image integrity
Case record
The clinical timeline, investigations, interventions, outcomes and follow-up must agree across text, tables and figures. An image-led report must supply the patient context and interpretation needed to understand its finding.
Evidence limits
A case may document an observation, identify a signal or support clinical learning. It does not independently establish causality, efficacy, prevalence, comparative superiority, population-level safety or clinical guidelines.
Image integrity
Adjustments must not add, remove or obscure clinical information. Editors may request original image files where integrity is in question.
Data availability
Authors should state what supporting data can be shared while protecting patient confidentiality and complying with consent, law and institutional rules.
The CARE checklist guides individual case reports. Case series should state selection, methods, outcomes and limitations and use reporting guidance appropriate to their design. Suspected fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate image manipulation or undisclosed overlap is investigated using the available record and relevant COPE guidance.
Competing interests, recusal and confidentiality
- Authors
- Disclose financial, personal, professional and institutional relationships that could reasonably be perceived to influence the work, together with all funding sources.
- Reviewers
- Decline or disclose a conflict before reviewing. Manuscripts and review materials remain confidential and must not be uploaded to an external AI system.
- Editors
- Recuse from manuscripts involving their own work, close collaborators, institutions or other material conflicts. Another qualified editor manages the record independently.
- Editor-authored work
- An editor's own submission receives no advantage and is handled outside that editor's control through the same review and decision standards.
Corrections, retractions and expressions of concern
Material errors are addressed through an appropriately labeled correction linked to the original article. Retractions identify the affected article and explain the reason and responsible party when the established record permits. An expression of concern may be used while a serious unresolved issue is investigated.
Notices remain linked and discoverable. The original publication record is not silently erased, and authors or institutions are contacted where due process requires their response.
Appeals and complaints
An author may appeal an editorial decision by identifying a specific factual, procedural or interpretive issue and supplying supporting evidence. Disagreement alone does not reverse a decision. The appeal is reviewed by an editor who can assess the record without the conflict under challenge.
Complaints about conduct, confidentiality, peer review or publication ethics should identify the manuscript or article and the concern. The editorial office records the complaint, obtains relevant evidence and communicates the outcome or next step.
Open access, license and APC independence
- License
- Published articles use the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. Authors retain copyright and users must provide appropriate attribution.
- APC
- The article processing charge is invoiced only after editorial acceptance. Ability to pay, a waiver request or payment status does not affect peer review or the editorial decision.
- Policy links
- Preparation requirements belong in the Instructions for Authors; the fee schedule and withdrawal policy belong on the APC page.
Questions about a policy or publication record?
Contact the editorial office with the manuscript or article identifier and the specific issue requiring review.
Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Images · JCCI · ISSN 2641-5518 · Open Access Pub
Digital preservation
This journal’s content is committed to Portico, a not-for-profit digital-preservation archive run by ITHAKA (the organization behind JSTOR). As articles are deposited they enter Portico’s permanent archive, so the scholarly record stays available for the long term — even if a title one day ceases to publish. Read our preservation policy.