Article
Time to rethink, reconsider and reinvite case reports!
We, as clinicians come across interesting, or challenging clinical cases in our everyday practice. Few of these cases stand apart, as they may be combined with an interesting observation, a rare clinical sign, unexplored association of various clinical manifestations, etc.1 Unfortunately, case reports are not being accepted by many reputed journals and are tagged as the lowest level of research.2 Many journals flatly refuse to accept case reports and consider them as beyond the scope of publishing. Sadly, some journals, which do accept them, quote exorbitant article processing charges, which demotivates the authors further. Most indexed journals do not support publishing case reports, which has paved the way for predatory and dubious journals to fill this void, publishing case reports while charging the fees. This is one of the known barriers, preventing competent clinicians from sharing their experiences in the form of case reports and series.
The current medical literature primarily focuses on evidence-based practice which has led to the notable decline in the publishing of clinical case reports,2 possibly due to the inability of scrutinizing the originality of the case, with an inherent risk of fraudulent information being incorporated to make it more appealing. Furthermore, the lesser number of citations received for case reports compared to original research, meta-analysis and reviews, which indirectly hampers the overall journal performance assessment and impact factor, further discourages the publishing of case reports.3
Case reports can still serve as a useful platform to share our unique and interesting experiences and to reinforce certain overlooked clinical diagnostic clues. They serve as teaching aids for educating healthcare students.4 Moreover, the novel management strategies or follow-up protocols adopted in specific disorders, and its response, could help us to think beyond the traditional options and seed research ideas. Thus, case reports contribute to a modest but significant role in knowledge dissemination.
To ensure completeness and transparency of published case reports, a consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline, termed ‘CARE’ (CAse REport) has been formulated.1 A CARE guidelines checklist helps the author to document the clinical case reports accurately and this checklist has become an integral part of the manuscript submission platform in recognized journals. On the other hand, PROCESS (Preferred Reporting Of CasE Series in Surgery) guidelines are recommended while documenting surgical case reports, and this has improved reporting transparency of case series across several surgical specialties.5
It is time to realize that case reports contain a small but significant piece of disrupted information, unlike original research articles, which may have technical and processing errors inherent to the study design. However, shouldn't we reconsider and reinvite case reports and recognize their duly deserved position in the medical literature? In the mad rush to compete with journal ratings, citations and impact factors, etc, are we ignoring the reader's choices?