Journal of Clinical Case Reports and ImagesFor Editors
Guidance for editors
An operational framework for screening case-based submissions, managing independent review and making decisions that respect patient integrity and evidentiary limits.
Editorial role and independence
Editors assess scope, clinical relevance, reporting completeness and ethical readiness; select appropriately qualified reviewers; interpret the review record; and provide a reasoned decision. Apply the same patient-centered fit rule across specialties and interdisciplinary cases. Assess Clinical Images as image-led clinical accounts, and require Technical Notes to demonstrate their technique in a documented patient case or related cases.
APC status, ability to pay, waiver requests, institutional prestige, editorial membership and reviewer service must not influence handling or acceptance. Editors recuse from their own submissions and from other material personal, professional, financial or institutional conflicts.
Initial manuscript screen
| Screen | Editorial question | Action if unresolved |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Is this a Case Report, Clinical Images, Case Series or Technical Note with a defined clinical learning point? | Return or decline with the scope reason. |
| Patient record | Are consent, de-identification and ethics statements present and internally consistent? | Do not send for review until resolved. |
| Evidence | Can the diagnosis, management and outcome be followed from the supplied record? | Request essential missing information or decline. |
| Images | Are figures interpretable, relevant, labeled, permitted and free of visible identifiers? | Request corrected files or integrity clarification. |
| Claims | Do conclusions stay within what one case or case series can support? | Require correction before or during review. |
Reviewer selection and review management
Expertise
Select reviewers with direct knowledge of the condition, procedure, diagnostic question or imaging modality.
Independence
Check collaborations, institutions, declared relationships and other conflicts before assignment.
Confidentiality
Share reviewer materials only through the approved system. Keep signed consent forms out of reviewer circulation and require prior authorization for AI or automated content processing.
Useful reports
Require comments that address the evidence, ethics and clinical interpretation rather than prestige or author identity.
Review model and assignments
Peer review: Single-blind by default; double-blind review is available on request. Manuscripts that proceed to external peer review are normally evaluated by at least two independent subject-matter experts.
Verify each reviewer's identity, current affiliation and clinical or methodological expertise using institutional and publication records; do not rely on author-supplied details alone. The handling editor retains responsibility for reviewer selection.
When double-blind review is requested, editors must ensure that author-identifying information is not shared with reviewers.
Decision standards for case evidence
A publishable case may clarify recognition, differential diagnosis, management, complications, safety or a procedure. Rarity or a first-ever observation is not required. Diagnostic challenges and unusual responses are contribution themes within accepted formats. Standalone trials, population studies, reviews and device papers do not qualify merely because they concern medicine.
Require revision where claims of causality, efficacy, prevalence, comparative superiority, population-level safety or practice recommendations exceed the evidence. The CARE checklist guides individual case reports; assess case-series selection, methods, outcomes and limitations using guidance appropriate to the design. Decline work that remains unreportable because of consent, privacy, fabrication, image manipulation, duplicate publication or an unsupported clinical conclusion.
Decision communication
State the decision, the principal reasons and the changes required. Separate major scientific or ethical issues from minor presentation corrections and avoid promises about eventual acceptance.
Clinical images and patient integrity
- Consent
- Confirm written-consent status and the consent statement, including explicit permission for identifiable images and recordings. Keep sensitive signed consent material within authorized editorial handling and out of reviewer circulation. Removing identifiers does not automatically remove the need for consent. Escalate any exception for assessment under journal policy, applicable law and institutional requirements.
- De-identification
- Inspect text, figures, captions and embedded metadata for names, dates, numbers or features that could identify the patient.
- Interpretability
- Require the modality, orientation, staining, magnification, scale or annotation needed to support the stated finding. For clinical video, confirm supported file formats and publication arrangements before progressing the submission; apply the same clinical context, privacy and interpretation checks as for still images.
- Manipulation
- Request original files where adjustment, duplication, inconsistent labeling or altered clinical meaning is suspected.
- Correlation
- Where the conclusion depends on pathology, imaging, procedure or outcome correlation, ensure both sides of the evidence are shown.
Conflicts, misconduct, appeals and published-record changes
- After recusal, assign a non-conflicted editor with full decision authority. The recused editor must not select reviewers, access confidential handling discussions or influence the decision.
- Document suspected plagiarism, fabrication, image manipulation, duplicate publication or undisclosed conflict and report it to the Editor-in-Chief through the editorial office at [email protected]. If the Editor-in-Chief is conflicted, escalate to the publisher for an independent senior editor. Pause the affected review or decision as appropriate, preserve evidence, seek a documented response through authorized editorial channels and record the outcome.
- Assess appeals against the original record and specific grounds, not simply a repeated argument for acceptance.
- Use linked corrections, retractions or expressions of concern when the published record requires action; do not silently erase it.
- Reviewers must obtain journal permission before using AI to assist with a review. Any permitted use must be disclosed, and confidential manuscript content must not be uploaded where confidentiality cannot be assured. AI, automated content analysis, translation or summarization of manuscript content requires prior editorial authorization.
Use the policy record for difficult decisions
Document scope, ethics, review, conflict and evidence-limit reasoning in the manuscript record.
Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Images · JCCI · ISSN 2641-5518 · Open Access Pub