WJES and case reports/case series

CRs should start with an abstract of maximum of 350 words. The aim of the abstract is to allow readers to discern their levels of interest in the CR. The abstract should Published: 8 May 2007 World Journal of Emergency Surgery 2007, 2:11 doi:10.1186/1749-7922-2-11 Received: 22 March 2007 Accepted: 8 May 2007 This article is available from: http://www.wjes.org/content/2/1/11 © 2007 Ansaloni et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Page 1 of 4 (page number not for citation purposes) World Journal of Emergency Surgery 2007, 2:11 http://www.wjes.org/content/2/1/11 be structured into the same three sections as the main text in a succinct form: Background, Case Report and Discussion. Background The background should convince the reader in a concise and relevant manner to continue reading and also provide all the necessary information about what the CR is about, providing its subject, purpose and value. This section should clarify why the CR is novel or merits publication with a brief description of the patient case and also a discussion of similar cases or studies in the context of a wider review of the literature on this topic. The literature review should list the strategy and coverage of the search and should include the database searched and the search terms used, providing enough elements for the reader to easily replicate the search. Case report Within this section, the authors should provide the characteristics of the pathology, all significant data and interesting information about the patient and their lifestyle, which could be in some way linked to the condition. To respect patient privacy, it is important to omit all unessential personal information or data in order to anonymize the case. Informed consent is considered mandatory for publication and should be detailed at the end of this section. The CR should describe the patient's demographics and history, their laboratory and diagnostic data and the history of their medications. The case should be described in chronological order and with enough details to give the reader a chance to formulate their own opinion and evaluate the case's validity. It's important that a report stimulates inquiries, commentaries and remarks. Indeed, readers have the ability to, and are encouraged to post a comment on the published article, generating further discussion. Whilst the author should be succinct, and describe the case without leaving the reader doubtful about the correct management, they should not overload the reader with excess information. Fluency and clarity of the CR can be enhanced by the use of tables, graphs, figures and illustrations. Usually, most of the information contained in these additional parts should not be duplicated in the text. In particular colour pictures of histopathology, roentgenograms, electrocardiographs, and other diagnostic tests; skin manifestations; wounds; and other anatomical parts may be provided and add to the interest of the CR. It is imperative that any identifying features of a patient's photograph should be blocked out and patient permission for obtaining and using photographs must have been sought and included in the consent statement. Discussion This is arguably the most important part of the article, because in this section the author should indicate the CR's accuracy, validity and uniqueness, comparing it with the published literature in order to derive new knowledge and applicability to practice. To obtain this the author must point out the value of the CR by demonstrating the validity of the diagnostic hypothesis and the therapeutic decisions, and comparing it with similar CRs if they exist. It is necessary to analyze the limits of the CR, describing the importance of each limit, but the main theme of the discussion should be the "lesson to be learned": if a CR doesn't teach anything new, it doesn't deserve to be published. Highlighting the practical applicability of the CR is important and should be clearly stated, relating to the eventual "evidence" already present in the literature and to the opportunities for future research. The discussion should conclude by briefly summarizing the CR, pointing out the lesson learned and joining it to eventual evidence based medicine recommendations. We hope to have provided readers with a useful overview of the importance and structure of case reports for WJES, and welcome submissions of interesting and important cases to the journal. Appendix 1. Criteria for publishable case reports Publishable CRs should meet one of the categories: The first report of a new entity, for example, the first description of a disease, syndrome, diagnostic test, surgical procedure. Additional examples that establish an entity from an isolated observation, such as the report of an already described, but rare (<5 cases already reported) or uncommon disease (10–15 cases already reported); the description of a rare, perplexing, or novel diagnostic features of a known disease, example of rare (<5 cases already Evidence Pyramid (MA = metanalysis, SR = systematic revi w, RCT = randomised co trolled trial, from http:// www.aub.edu.lb/librarie / dic l/ue / cochr ne_evidence.ht l [1]) Figu e 1 Evidence Pyramid (MA = metanalysis, SR = systematic review, RCT = randomised controlled trial, from http:// www.aub.edu.lb/libraries/medical/ues/ cochrane_evidence.html [1]). Page 2 of 4 (page number not for citation purposes) World Journal of Emergency Surgery 2007, 2:11 http://www.wjes.org/content/2/1/11 reported) or uncommon (10–15 cases already reported), but not necessarily unexpected, behaviour in any disease. Adverse events: the report of life-threatening adverse events, dangerous and predictable adverse effects that are poorly appreciated and rarely recognized in drugs or surgical procedures; the description of new medical errors or medication errors, rare or novel adverse drug reactions; the finding out of a device malfunction that results in patient harm; and the account of a therapeutic failure or a lack of therapeutic efficacy, clinical behaviour contrary to expectations based upon what we think we know. A remarkably well-documented example of educational value (report therapeutic challenges, controversies, or dilemmas; teach humanistic lessons to the health care professional).