AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Review Article | DOI: https://doi.org/DOI:10.31579/2578-8868/399
1Northwest Health Family Medicine Residency program (PGY-3)
2Molloy University Rockville Centre, NY.
3University of Illinois, Chicago, Illinois.
4Stanford Healthcare, CVICU, Palo Alto, California.
5Baruch College, New York, NY.
6Northwest Health- Porter Cardiology, Valparaiso, Indiana.
7Northwest Health- Porter Neurology, Valparaiso, Indiana.
8University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
*Corresponding Author: *Corresponding Author: Asia Filatov, Emeritus Professor of Psychiatry.
Citation: Laura Vives, Sarah Elassal, Brianna L. Sepulveda, Ashanti Matthews, Louisa Chan, et al, (2026), A Critical Examination of Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS): “Debunking the Myth”, J. Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, 19(1); DOI:10.31579/2578-8868/399
Copyright: © 2026, Asia Filatov. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of The Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited
Received: 21 January 2026 | Accepted: 27 January 2026 | Published: 02 February 2026
Keywords: orthostatic; tachycardia; syndrome; pathophysiology
The recognition of Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS) has sparked debate about its legitimacy, diagnostic criteria, and underlying mechanisms. This review critically examines controversies surrounding POTS, including professional perspectives on diagnosis and pathophysiology, the influence of social media on perceptions, and the evidence supporting its classification as a distinct syndrome.
The recognition of Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS) has sparked debate about its legitimacy, diagnostic criteria, and underlying mechanisms. This review critically examines controversies surrounding POTS, including professional perspectives on diagnosis and pathophysiology, the influence of social media on perceptions, and the evidence supporting its classification as a distinct syndrome. The analysis also addresses challenges such as diagnostic ambiguity, varied patient presentations, and the impact of misinformation on both medical skepticism and patient understanding.
Postural Orthostatic Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS) is characterized by an excessive increase in heart rate upon standing, often with symptoms such as dizziness, palpitations, and fatigue (Blitshteyn, 2022). While POTS has gained recognition in recent years, particularly within the fields of cardiology and autonomic neurology, skepticism remains regarding its legitimacy and pathophysiology. For instance, Magnus Group (2025) notes that TikTok content on POTS varies widely in quality and often lacks accuracy, raising concerns about misinformation in patient education. Some creators portray POTS as a sign of exceptionalism or heightened sensitivity (Bryarly et al., 2019), a depiction criticized for trivializing the condition and fostering unrealistic expectations about diagnosis and treatment.
One of the primary challenges in diagnosing POTS is the lack of clear diagnostic criteria. The condition is typically defined as a sustained increase in heart rate of ≥30 bpm within 10 minutes of standing, accompanied by symptoms such as orthostatic intolerance, palpitations, and fatigue (Chen et al., 2020). However, this definition is not universally accepted, and many clinicians argue that the diagnostic criteria are too broad, is a physiological phenomenon and nonspecific.
Given the complexity and heterogeneity of POTS, clinicians should adopt a critical and nuanced approach. Caution is warranted to avoid overdiagnosis and overtreatment, especially without clear diagnostic criteria or evidence based therapies. Effective evaluation and management require a comprehensive, multidisciplinary strategy
Pathophysiology of POTS
The pathophysiology of POTS remains incompletely understood, yet current evidence suggests it is multifactorial, involving an interplay between autonomic dysfunction, autoimmunity, and hypovolemia. As described by Blitshteyn (2022), POTS is characterized by a sustained heart rate increase of ≥30 bpm within 10 minutes of standing, frequently accompanied by symptoms such as dizziness, palpitations, and fatigue.
Autonomic dysfunction, particularly sympathetic denervation, is a hallmark of POTS. Studies such as Li, Qiu, and Gao (2025), for instance, have shown that patients with POTS exhibit impaired sympathetic vasoconstriction, leading to decreased venous return and cardiac output. This is often accompanied by increased parasympathetic activity, which can further exacerbate the tachycardia (Raj et al., 2020). In some cases, the autonomic dysfunction in POTS is thought to be related to impaired baroreflex sensitivity, which normally helps to regulate blood pressure and heart rate (Mandel et al., 2017).
Additionally, autoimmunity has been increasingly recognized as a potential contributing factor to POTS. Studies such as those by Bellocchi et al. (2022) have identified autoantibodies targeting various receptors and proteins in the autonomic nervous system, including adrenergic and muscarinic receptors. Notably, such autoantibodies may contribute to the development of POTS by disrupting normal autonomic function. Patients with POTS have a higher prevalence of autoimmune disorders, such as diabetes, neuropathy, Hashimoto's thyroiditis, and rheumatoid arthritis (Aboseif et al., 2023).
Hypovolemia, or reduced blood volume, is common in POTS and is linked to decreased cardiac output and compensatory heart rate increases (Wei et al., 2025). Ranada (2025) suggests this may result from impaired vasopressin release, causing increased urine production and further reducing blood volume. POTS has long been debated in the medical community, with multiple theories proposed to explain its pathophysiology.
To begin with, in the 1990s, POTS was often attributed to anxiety and a hyperadrenergic state, with some researchers suggesting that patients with POTS were simply experiencing a manifestation of anxiety disorders. Subsequently, studies have shown that POTS is a distinct clinical entity that is not solely caused by anxiety or a hyperadrenergic state. Patients with POTS exhibit abnormal autonomic nervous system function, including impaired baroreflex sensitivity and abnormal vasoconstriction (Li, Qiu & Gao, 2025).
Some researchers have attributed POTS to physical deconditioning, metabolic syndrome and insufficient exercise (Walsh et al., 2025). While lack of physical activity may contribute to certain symptoms, it is not the primary cause. Studies indicate that POTS involves abnormal autonomic nervous system function, which cannot be explained by physical deconditioning alone (Raj et al., 2020).
Furthermore, some researchers, for instance, Quigley, Noble, and Ansari (2024) argue that POTS was caused by hypermobility and Ehlers-Danlos, a condition characterized by excessive laxity of
the connective tissue. While some patients with POTS may exhibit hypermobility, it is not a universal feature of the disorder. On the other hand, the study by Mandel et al. (2017) has indicated that POTS is not caused by Ehlers-Danlos or other connective tissue disorders.
Clinical Assessment, Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria, and Challenges
For a presumed diagnosis of POTS, clinicians must ensure that the patient meets various criteria. To begin with, there must be a rise in heart rate of >30 bpm for adults or >40 bpm for individuals aged 12-19 within 10 minutes of standing or head-up tilt. Moreover, the patient must indicate no orthostatic hypotension with a drop in BP of ≥ 20 mmHg. Thirdly, the patient must present with frequent symptoms while standing, with rapid improvement upon returning to the supine position. Notably, the duration of symptoms must persist for at least 3 months, and, lastly, the patient must not present with other conditions that could lead to sinus tachycardia. For example, a heart rate exceeding 120 beats per minute is no longer a diagnostic criterion (Qu & Hakonarson, 2024). Tachycardia is a primary feature of POTS, but central nervous system symptoms such as fatigue, dizziness, cognitive dysfunction, and sleep disturbances are often most troublesome for patients (Blitshteyn, 2022).
One primary reason for skepticism among physicians is the heterogeneous nature of POTS symptoms and their overlap with other conditions. POTS patients often present with a variety of nonspecific symptoms that can easily be misattributed to anxiety, lifestyle factors, or other neurologic disorders (Walsh et al., 2025). Patients with POTS may also have other presumed diagnoses, including but not limited to Fibromuscular dysplasia, Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, and fibromyalgia. It is important to recognize that conditions such as anxiety, chronic pain, and deconditioning can contribute to or worsen POTS. Symptom overlap with other medical conditions complicates diagnosis. As Qu and Hakonarson (2024) note, this complexity highlights the need for a comprehensive, patient-centered, and multidisciplinary diagnostic approach.
Concerns have arisen about patients being diagnosed with POTS without meeting established criteria, often due to misunderstandings within the medical community. For example, individuals with orthostatic intolerance but not excessive tachycardia, or those with tachycardia from medications or prolonged bed rest, may be misdiagnosed (Raj et al., 2020). Symptom variability, differences in diagnostic tests, and individual resting heart rates should be carefully considered during assessment (Raj et al., 2020).
Confusion over nomenclature and terminology contributes to POTS misdiagnosis (Raj et al., 2020). Disagreements persist about whether POTS is strictly a cardiovascular disorder or also involves systemic symptoms, particularly in patients with comorbidities like Ehlers-Danlos syndrome. These cases may require more precise diagnoses due to differing prognosis and treatment responses (Raj et al., 2020).
The Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS), upon appointing a primary panel, also emphasized the importance of defining not only POTS but also related syndromes that may not meet the established diagnostic criteria but still require treatment, such as some forms of orthostatic intolerance (Boris et al., 2024). They intentionally did not expand the definition of POTS beyond the American Autonomic Society’s definition but did attempt to clarify aspects of it, thereby acknowledging the complexity of POTS.
As a result of the broader spectrum of disorders in relation to POTS, the misdiagnosis of POTS and the related spectrum of orthostatic tachycardia and intolerance disorders continues to play a major role in the overall skepticism and challenges in the diagnosis and treatment of POTS (Raj et al., 2020).
Controversies & Clinical Skepticism
There is also a perception that POTS may not be a distinct syndrome, but rather a cluster of symptoms linked to other underlying conditions (Ranada, 2025). This interpretation is supported by the heterogeneous clinical presentations and frequent comorbidity with disorders such as Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, fibromuscular dysplesia, mast cell activation syndrome, fibromylagia, anxiety, and autoimmune diseases. Such diagnostic ambiguity creates challenges for physicians, who often find it difficult to distinguish POTS from other overlapping symptom complexes or to determine if it represents an independent entity or a broader spectrum of dysautonomia (Qu & Hakonarson, 2024). In addition, epidemiological studies report a higher prevalence of POTS among Caucasian populations, yet the underrepresentation of other racial or ethnic groups in research raises concerns about possible health disparities. This disparity may reflect genetic susceptibility, environmental factors, and systemic barriers to healthcare, including clinician awareness and diagnostic practices. However, current literature does not provide conclusive evidence that higher prevalence is due solely to genetic or biological factors, and the lack of diversity in research populations may hinder a comprehensive understanding of POTS. Therefore, more inclusive research and thorough analysis of existing data are necessary to accurately determine the true distribution of POTS.
The development and prevalence of POTS may be influenced by genetic factors that affect the autonomic function, blood volume, or cardiovascular response. Environmental factors such as diet, stress, and activity levels can further modulate these genetic traits, although they vary across racial and ethnic populations (Qu & Hakonarson, 2024). Nevertheless, the limited healthcare access, cultural differences in symptom reporting, as well as potential healthcare biases contribute to the misdiagnosis and disparities in the recognition and treatment of POTS in certain populations. Usually, the condition and aetiology of POTS arise from a complex interplay of physiological, immunological, and neurological factors (Sundarrajan, Ravichandran & Ramachandran, 2024).
Additionally, autoimmune responses targeting the autonomic nervous system or other self-antigens may contribute to POTS. In most cases, this condition is characterized by a higher prevalence of autoimmune markers and comorbid autoimmune disorders such as Hashimoto’s thyroiditis and rheumatoid arthritis. Triggers like long Covid-19, HPV vaccination, infections, or trauma can lead to immunological changes associated with POTS (El-Rhermoul et al., 2023). Autoantibodies, including ganglion acetylcholine receptors and G-protein-coupled receptor autoantibodies, have also been identified. Fortunately, immunomodulatory treatments targeting these autoantibodies have shown promise in alleviating symptoms.
Inflammation also plays a significant role in POTS. For example, elevated autoimmune and inflammatory markers and a higher prevalence of co-occurring inflammatory conditions show the relationship between POTS and inflammation. In this case, small fiber neuropathy, mast cell activation syndrome, chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis, and infections like Lyme disease are potential inflammatory conditions that are closely associated with POTS (Blitshteyn, 2022). These conditions highlight the contribution of immune and inflammatory mechanisms to POTS pathophysiology.
Additionally, the endocrine system can influence POTS by disrupting the hormonal regulation of blood pressure and heart rate. Abnormalities in the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system and adrenal glands are implicated in POTS (Sundarrajan, Ravichandran & Ramachandran, 2024). However, endocrine conditions such as pheochromocytoma, which causes excess epinephrine and tachycardia, are usually ruled out in POTS diagnosis.
Moreover, controversial reports have suggested a potential link between POTS and HPV vaccination, with one proposed mechanism being molecular mimicry, in which antibodies may cross-react with G- protein-coupled receptors (GPCR). However, this theory is considered insufficient because the rapid onset of POTS following vaccination occurs too quickly for IgG antibodies to develop (Qu & Hakonarson, 2024).
As noted in the Canadian Cardiovascular Society position statement, one challenge in diagnosing and treating POTS is that it is not a single disease but rather a broad spectrum of disorders, some of which align with the original definition of POTS while others do not (Rajet et al., 2020). The new classification which has been developed by the Writing Committee based on expert opinion is aimed at enhancing a better characterization of the disorder in addition to the traditional POTS definition, the suggested diagnostic spectrum of orthostatic tachycardia and orthostatic intolerance include POTS Plus, Postural Symptoms Without Orthostatic Tachycardia (PSWT), Postural Symptoms Without Orthostatic Tachycardia Plus (PSWT Plus) and Postural Tachycardia of Other Cause (PTOC) (Blitshteyn, 2022).With the classification and nomenclature of the subtypes of POTS, this may further create skepticism and contribute to the complexity and ambiguity of POTS.
Neurology perspective: Lack of Consensus on Pathophysiology
The unclear pathophysiology of POTS contributes to skepticism among neurologists. While some evidence links POTS to dysautonomia, blood volume abnormalities, and hyperadrenergic states, these mechanisms are not universally accepted (Blitshteyn, 2022). The diagnostic criteria, which rely on a heart rate increase of ≥30 bpm within 10 minutes of standing, are criticized for lacking specificity and being influenced by factors such as anxiety, dehydration, and physical conditioning. The absence of a definitive diagnostic standard makes POTS a diagnosis of exclusion, increasing the risk of misclassification.
Neurologists may question the validity of POTS as a distinct entity because there is no clear, agreed-upon biological marker or diagnostic test. Besides, this lack of consensus can create an impression that POTS is more of a catch-all diagnosis rather than a distinct syndrome with a defined physiological basis (Raj et al., 2020). Autonomic neuropathies can also develop acutely or chronically, with acute-onset cases linked to paraneoplastic syndrome, Guillain-Barré syndrome, Sjögren's disease, toxins, or infections. On the other hand, chronic cases are often associated with autoimmune disorders and diabetes. These neuropathies disrupt the autonomic nervous system, affecting blood flow and heart rate regulation, which may contribute to POTS (Qu & Hakonarson 2024).
Despite its widespread recognition, POTS remains contentious regarding its pathophysiology, diagnostic criteria, and epidemiology. On one hand, some researchers underscore progress in elucidating potential mechanisms, pointing to autonomic dysfunction, autoimmunity, and hypovolemia as contributing factors supported by emerging evidence. On the other hand, critics argue that such mechanisms often rely on inconsistent or inconclusive data, with findings frequently varying across studies and patient cohorts (Qu & Hakonarson, 2024). The heterogeneity of POTS patients and the variability of symptoms further complicate the identification of a single, unified mechanism. Thus, a critical analysis of both supportive and skeptical perspectives is essential in assessing the existing evidence, as ongoing debate continues to shape our understanding of POTS pathophysiology.
Another factor influencing neurologists' attitudes toward POTS is its potential overlap with psychosomatic disorders. Many patients with POTS report heightened anxiety and psychological distress, which further complicates the clinical picture (Boris et al., 2024). For example, some neurologists may attribute symptoms to anxiety or other psychological factors rather than recognizing POTS as a distinct physiological condition. This view may be reinforced by the fact that many patients with POTS are young women, a group often subjected to biases that can obscure underlying neurological disorders. As observed by Boris et al. (2024), somatic manifestations, functional neurological complaints, confounded by social media hysteria, can make POTS a difficult diagnosis. With this, the increasing prevalence of POTS diagnoses is, in part, a consequence of misdiagnosis and overdiagnosis. For instance, patients with anxiety disorders, vasovagal syncope, or other conditions may be mislabeled as having POTS, thus reinforcing a myth that lacks a scientific basis.
Physicians should prioritize evidence-based medicine and address unsubstantiated claims. It is our responsibility to provide accurate diagnoses and effective treatments, rather than perpetuating a flawed concept that may lead to misdiagnosis and inadequate care.
Neurology Perspective: ADHD, Depression, Anxiety Treatments, and Autonomic Dysregulation
There has been a growing body of research and related evidence underscoring that psychotropic medications that are commonly recommended for ADHD, anxiety, and depression could result in secondary POTS-associated symptoms. For example, stimulants, including amphetamine and methylphenidate derivatives, are effective for ADHD; there are fears that they could heighten sympathetic tone while also exacerbating palpitations, orthostatic intolerance, and tachycardia intolerance (Williams et al., 2023). Additionally, SNRIs and SSRIs, commonly used for anxiety and depression, attune norepinephrine and serotonin pathways that interact with autonomic regulation. As such, they may alter baroreflex sensitivity and the sympathetic-parasympathetic balance, thereby resulting in dysautonomia-like manifestations (Walsh et al., 2025).
In clinical practice, such overlaps could pose diagnostic challenges. For this reason, some young patients presenting with palpitations, fatigue, and dizziness while on psychotropic medications are sometimes miscategorized as manifesting somatoform disorder and undertreated anxiety. Besides, Attard et al. (2023) note that some autonomic side effects of SNRIs and SSRIs medications could unmask or mimic POTS, thus compromising the clinical goals and picture. Nonetheless, the psychosomatic stigma centered around young women presenting with these symptoms often results in misdiagnosis and dismissal. Consequently, this reinforces skepticism around POTS as an accredited entity.
Neurologists emphasize the need to distinguish primary POTS from secondary autonomic dysregulation caused by medications. Karim et al. (2023) highlight the importance of thorough medication review and autonomic testing. Interdisciplinary collaboration among cardiology, neurology, and psychiatry is essential to enhance patient safety and address challenges. Recognizing medication-induced dysautonomia can prevent unnecessary POTS diagnoses and ensure appropriate interventions, such as dose adjustments, supportive therapy, or medication changes (Qu and Hakonarson, 2024).
Cardiology perspective
The majority of concerns among professionals concerning patients being diagnosed with POTS without meeting the diagnostic criteria is often due to misunderstandings of the criteria within the medical community. Some patients, for example, with orthostatic intolerance but not excessive tachycardia or those with conditions that exacerbate tachycardia, such as medications and prolonged bed rest, might be incorrectly diagnosed with POTS (Raj et al., 2020).
Orthostatic tachycardia symptoms can vary daily and depend on the diagnostic method used, such as stand tests versus head-up tilt tests (Raj et al., 2020). Individuals with low resting heart rates may not meet POTS criteria despite a normal heart rate increase upon standing. Accurate diagnosis requires careful consideration of symptom variability, test type, and resting heart rate (Raj et al., 2020). POTS is primarily characterized by dysautonomia, which disrupts the balance between sympathetic and parasympathetic activity, impairing heart rate and blood pressure regulation (Qu HQ, Hakonarson H. 2024).
Sympathetic denervation, which is characterized by reduced sympathetic nerve activity, contributes to autonomic dysfunction in POTS by disrupting the coordination between the nervous and cardiovascular systems (Blitshteyn, 2022). In this case, the denervation often results in reduced venoconstriction in the lower extremities, thus leading to thoracic hypovolemia. In some patients with neuropathic POTS, mild small-fiber neuropathy is present. It involves abnormalities in unmyelinated nerve fibers in the skin, which are linked to reduced postganglionic sympathetic innervation of the myocardium of the heart (Qu& Hakonarson, 2024). Thoracic hypovolemia is a key factor in POTS. It involves reduced blood volume in the thoracic cavity, leading to decreased venous return (Wei et al., 2025). Notably, it is associated with increased splanchnic blood flow, blood pooling in the lower extremities, dehydration, and insufficient fluid intake. POTS risk increases by 3.9 times in children who consume less than 800 mL of water per day. Also, intermittent IV saline infusions have been shown to significantly reduce symptoms and improve the quality of life.
The unclear pathophysiology of POTS contributes to the perception that it is a broad, non-specific diagnosis rather than a distinct syndrome with a defined physiological basis.
Role of Beta Blockers and Ivabradine
Beta blockers, particularly propranolol, are commonly used for symptomatic management of POTS. Raj (2020) reports that propranolol can improve palpitations and quality of life, including exercise tolerance. However, nonselective beta blockers may worsen fatigue, reduce exercise capacity, and increase hypotension risk (Marti et al., 2024). Lower doses of propranolol may be more effective, as higher doses can suppress compensatory mechanisms needed to maintain blood pressure (Richalet, Hermand & Lhuissier, 2024).
Ivabradine, a selective inhibitor of the IF current in the sinoatrial node, may offer a therapeutic alternative to beta blockers. Unlike beta blockers, ivabradine lowers heart rate without significantly affecting blood pressure or myocardial contractility (Abseer et al., 2022), making it suitable for patients who cannot tolerate beta blockers due to fatigue, bradycardia or hypotension. Studies, including Taub et al. (2021), suggest ivabradine may improve quality of life and reduce orthostatic tachycardia, though randomized controlled trial data are limited and long-term safety remains under investigation. The choice between ivabradine and propranolol should be individualized based on patient tolerance and comorbidities, highlighting the need for tailored therapy in POTS.
Gaps and Variability in Research and Literature
Variability in research findings has fueled skepticism about POTS, especially among clinicians. Some studies report significant symptom improvement with treatment, while others show minimal or inconsistent benefits. This inconsistency undermines confidence in current therapies and raises concerns about the rigor and generalizability of the studies. Many studies use small samples, vary in their diagnostic criteria, or assess subjective outcomes, limiting the ability to draw definitive conclusions. The lack of large, randomized controlled trials further fragments the evidence base, hindering robust meta-analyses and standardized care protocols. As a result, specialists remain cautious about the reliability of the literature and the validity of POTS as a distinct diagnosis.
Heterogeneity among patients, cohorts, and outcomes hinders robust conclusions in POTS research. Inconsistent participant inclusion further limits scientific understanding. The burden of POTS symptoms is high, particularly in relation to orthostatic intolerance when compared to other long-term conditions. Unfortunately, there are no effective randomized controlled trials of treatment to reduce symptoms in POTS.The ongoing challenge to produce consistent, standardized data highlights significant research gaps (Boris et al., 2024). Most studies focus on sample size, follow-up duration, and variable diagnostic criteria, resulting in conflicting conclusions about treatment efficacy.
The lack of large, randomized controlled trials weakens the evidence base and perpetuates uncertainty in the medical community. Promising interventions such as beta blockers, midodrine, or ivabradine have not consistently demonstrated benefits in rigorous studies (Marks, 2024). This unpredictability undermines clinician confidence, particularly among those who rely on evidence-based practice.
Social Media Influence
Reasons Behind POTS' Popularity on TikTok
Social media platforms such as TikTok have become influential sources of health information, with users sharing personal experiences and symptoms. This trend has increased awareness and self-diagnosis of conditions like POTS.
TikTok is one of the fastest-growing influential social media platforms with over 150 million U.S. users. It has significantly influenced American culture and health communication, with users sharing personal experiences (Eaton, 2024). Its popularity, especially among adults under 30, has made it a go-to platform for spreading information, including health-related content, such as diagnoses and symptoms. The number of U.S. adults using it for news has tripled from 2020 to 2022 (Kirkpatrick & Lawrie, 2024). Americans increasingly turned to TikTok for health information during the COVID-19 pandemic, with medical professionals and institutions using the platform to disseminate pandemic-related guidance. Today, TikTok's health-related content covers a wide range of topics. For instance, studies show that users appreciate accessing health advice there, with 1 in 5 Americans and 1 in 3 from Generation Z consulting TikTok for health information before seeing a physician. Most POTS content on TikTok is created by non-clinicians, who may not have the necessary knowledge or training to provide accurate information. As such, TikTok is more likely to disseminate incorrect or misleading information.
TikTok, through its engaging video format, fosters authentic communication and makes health-related content memorable through combined visual and verbal information. While TikTok’s platform effectively spreads “credible” health information, research shows that 1 in 5 TikTok videos contain misinformation (Kirkpatrick & Lawrie, 2024). This highlights the essential need for further research into how young women use TikTok for health information and their perceptions and behaviors regarding the content they encounter.
Relatable Content - Users share relatable symptoms and experiences, creating a sense of community.
Influencer Culture- Influencers and content creators raise awareness, sharing personal stories.
Weaknesses
Misdiagnosis and Misattribution- Non-experts misinterpret symptoms, attributing them to POTS.
Medical Gaslighting- Patient reports feeling dismissed or misdiagnosed by healthcare professionals.
Sensationalism and clickbait: Some creators may prioritize sensational or provocative content to attract views and engagement, rather than providing accurate and reliable information.
While personal stories can be powerful and relatable, they may not be representative of the broader POTS community or accurate in terms of medical information.
Algorithmic amplification: TikTok's algorithm may amplify certain types of content, including misinformation, if it is more engaging or provocative.
While social media has popularized information about POTS and general health, it also presents challenges for physicians. Patients may arrive with misconceived notions or self-diagnoses based on unreliable content, potentially complicating the clinical evaluation. To address these challenges, clinicians and healthcare systems could collaborate to actively disseminate evidence-based material on widely used platforms, ensuring that accessible health information is both accurate and comprehensible. By engaging with digital communities, medical professionals may be able to guide public discourse and reduce the prevalence of misinformation, ultimately facilitating more effective patient-provider interactions.
The confusion of mistaking one illness for another is more common than you can imagine. “In addition, 12 videos (24%) mentioned a link between MCAS (Mast Cell Activation Syndrome), FMD (Fibromuscular dysplasia), fibromyalgia, POTS, and EDS (Ehlers-Danlos syndrome). In this case, misinformation trends included inaccuracies about symptoms, diagnostic methods, triggers, and treatment options. These misleading videos could contribute to confusion among patients seeking reliable information about their condition. On social media, self-diagnosis is due to the recurring misinformation produced based on a short list of symptoms. Misinformation may lead people to misinterpret their symptoms or delay seeking medical attention, consequently worsening their condition. Relying on inaccurate advice may lead to ineffective or even harmful treatments. Additionally, the spread of misinformation can contribute to stigma and skepticism around POTS, making it harder for people to access legitimate care and support.
To address these issues, it is essential to encourage the use of reputable medical organizations and healthcare professionals as information sources. Supporting fact-based content from credible medical professionals (Boris et al., 2024) and promoting critical evaluation of health information, especially on social media, are also important.
Skepticism about POTS among medical professionals stems from factors such as heterogeneous clinical presentations, lack of consensus on pathophysiology, inconsistent research findings, and overlap with psychosomatic disorders. Addressing these challenges through rigorous research, improved diagnostic criteria, and increased awareness may clarify POTS within the medical community. Future progress in biomarker discovery, diagnostic standardization, and innovative therapies could transform perceptions of POTS. Ongoing interdisciplinary collaboration will be crucial for developing patient-centered care models and improving outcomes for those affected.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
I would like to offer my testimony in the support. I have received through the peer review process and support the editorial office where they are to support young authors like me, encourage them to publish their work in your esteemed journals, and globalize and share knowledge globally. I really appreciate your journal, peer review, and editorial office.
Dear Agrippa Hilda- Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, "The peer review process was very quick and of high quality, which can also be seen in the articles in the journal. The collaboration with the editorial office was very good."
I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the support and efficiency provided by the editorial office throughout the publication process of my article, “Delayed Vulvar Metastases from Rectal Carcinoma: A Case Report.” I greatly appreciate the assistance and guidance I received from your team, which made the entire process smooth and efficient. The peer review process was thorough and constructive, contributing to the overall quality of the final article. I am very grateful for the high level of professionalism and commitment shown by the editorial staff, and I look forward to maintaining a long-term collaboration with the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
To Dear Erin Aust, I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation for the opportunity to have my work published in this esteemed journal. The entire publication process was smooth and well-organized, and I am extremely satisfied with the final result. The Editorial Team demonstrated the utmost professionalism, providing prompt and insightful feedback throughout the review process. Their clear communication and constructive suggestions were invaluable in enhancing my manuscript, and their meticulous attention to detail and dedication to quality are truly commendable. Additionally, the support from the Editorial Office was exceptional. From the initial submission to the final publication, I was guided through every step of the process with great care and professionalism. The team's responsiveness and assistance made the entire experience both easy and stress-free. I am also deeply impressed by the quality and reputation of the journal. It is an honor to have my research featured in such a respected publication, and I am confident that it will make a meaningful contribution to the field.
"I am grateful for the opportunity of contributing to [International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews] and for the rigorous review process that enhances the quality of research published in your esteemed journal. I sincerely appreciate the time and effort of your team who have dedicatedly helped me in improvising changes and modifying my manuscript. The insightful comments and constructive feedback provided have been invaluable in refining and strengthening my work".
I thank the ‘Journal of Clinical Research and Reports’ for accepting this article for publication. This is a rigorously peer reviewed journal which is on all major global scientific data bases. I note the review process was prompt, thorough and professionally critical. It gave us an insight into a number of important scientific/statistical issues. The review prompted us to review the relevant literature again and look at the limitations of the study. The peer reviewers were open, clear in the instructions and the editorial team was very prompt in their communication. This journal certainly publishes quality research articles. I would recommend the journal for any future publications.
Dear Jessica Magne, with gratitude for the joint work. Fast process of receiving and processing the submitted scientific materials in “Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions”. High level of competence of the editors with clear and correct recommendations and ideas for enriching the article.
We found the peer review process quick and positive in its input. The support from the editorial officer has been very agile, always with the intention of improving the article and taking into account our subsequent corrections.
My article, titled 'No Way Out of the Smartphone Epidemic Without Considering the Insights of Brain Research,' has been republished in the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. The review process was seamless and professional, with the editors being both friendly and supportive. I am deeply grateful for their efforts.
To Dear Erin Aust – Editorial Coordinator of Journal of General Medicine and Clinical Practice! I declare that I am absolutely satisfied with your work carried out with great competence in following the manuscript during the various stages from its receipt, during the revision process to the final acceptance for publication. Thank Prof. Elvira Farina
Dear Jessica, and the super professional team of the ‘Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions’ I am sincerely grateful to the coordinated work of the journal team for the no problem with the submission of my manuscript: “Cardiometabolic Disorders in A Pregnant Woman with Severe Preeclampsia on the Background of Morbid Obesity (Case Report).” The review process by 5 experts was fast, and the comments were professional, which made it more specific and academic, and the process of publication and presentation of the article was excellent. I recommend that my colleagues publish articles in this journal, and I am interested in further scientific cooperation. Sincerely and best wishes, Dr. Oleg Golyanovskiy.
Dear Ashley Rosa, Editorial Coordinator of the journal - Psychology and Mental Health Care. " The process of obtaining publication of my article in the Psychology and Mental Health Journal was positive in all areas. The peer review process resulted in a number of valuable comments, the editorial process was collaborative and timely, and the quality of this journal has been quickly noticed, resulting in alternative journals contacting me to publish with them." Warm regards, Susan Anne Smith, PhD. Australian Breastfeeding Association.
Dear Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator, Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, Auctores Publishing LLC. I appreciate the journal (JCCI) editorial office support, the entire team leads were always ready to help, not only on technical front but also on thorough process. Also, I should thank dear reviewers’ attention to detail and creative approach to teach me and bring new insights by their comments. Surely, more discussions and introduction of other hemodynamic devices would provide better prevention and management of shock states. Your efforts and dedication in presenting educational materials in this journal are commendable. Best wishes from, Farahnaz Fallahian.
Dear Maria Emerson, Editorial Coordinator, International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews, Auctores Publishing LLC. I am delighted to have published our manuscript, "Acute Colonic Pseudo-Obstruction (ACPO): A rare but serious complication following caesarean section." I want to thank the editorial team, especially Maria Emerson, for their prompt review of the manuscript, quick responses to queries, and overall support. Yours sincerely Dr. Victor Olagundoye.
Dear Ashley Rosa, Editorial Coordinator, International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. Many thanks for publishing this manuscript after I lost confidence the editors were most helpful, more than other journals Best wishes from, Susan Anne Smith, PhD. Australian Breastfeeding Association.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The entire process including article submission, review, revision, and publication was extremely easy. The journal editor was prompt and helpful, and the reviewers contributed to the quality of the paper. Thank you so much! Eric Nussbaum, MD
Dr Hala Al Shaikh This is to acknowledge that the peer review process for the article ’ A Novel Gnrh1 Gene Mutation in Four Omani Male Siblings, Presentation and Management ’ sent to the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was quick and smooth. The editorial office was prompt with easy communication.
Dear Erin Aust, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of General Medicine and Clinical Practice. We are pleased to share our experience with the “Journal of General Medicine and Clinical Practice”, following the successful publication of our article. The peer review process was thorough and constructive, helping to improve the clarity and quality of the manuscript. We are especially thankful to Ms. Erin Aust, the Editorial Coordinator, for her prompt communication and continuous support throughout the process. Her professionalism ensured a smooth and efficient publication experience. The journal upholds high editorial standards, and we highly recommend it to fellow researchers seeking a credible platform for their work. Best wishes By, Dr. Rakhi Mishra.
Dear Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator, Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, Auctores Publishing LLC. The peer review process of the journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions was excellent and fast, as was the support of the editorial office and the quality of the journal. Kind regards Walter F. Riesen Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Walter F. Riesen.
Dear Ashley Rosa, Editorial Coordinator, International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews, Auctores Publishing LLC. Thank you for publishing our article, Exploring Clozapine's Efficacy in Managing Aggression: A Multiple Single-Case Study in Forensic Psychiatry in the international journal of clinical case reports and reviews. We found the peer review process very professional and efficient. The comments were constructive, and the whole process was efficient. On behalf of the co-authors, I would like to thank you for publishing this article. With regards, Dr. Jelle R. Lettinga.
Dear Clarissa Eric, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Studies, I would like to express my deep admiration for the exceptional professionalism demonstrated by your journal. I am thoroughly impressed by the speed of the editorial process, the substantive and insightful reviews, and the meticulous preparation of the manuscript for publication. Additionally, I greatly appreciate the courteous and immediate responses from your editorial office to all my inquiries. Best Regards, Dariusz Ziora
Dear Chrystine Mejia, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of Neurodegeneration and Neurorehabilitation, Auctores Publishing LLC, We would like to thank the editorial team for the smooth and high-quality communication leading up to the publication of our article in the Journal of Neurodegeneration and Neurorehabilitation. The reviewers have extensive knowledge in the field, and their relevant questions helped to add value to our publication. Kind regards, Dr. Ravi Shrivastava.
Dear Clarissa Eric, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Studies, Auctores Publishing LLC, USA Office: +1-(302)-520-2644. I would like to express my sincere appreciation for the efficient and professional handling of my case report by the ‘Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Studies’. The peer review process was not only fast but also highly constructive—the reviewers’ comments were clear, relevant, and greatly helped me improve the quality and clarity of my manuscript. I also received excellent support from the editorial office throughout the process. Communication was smooth and timely, and I felt well guided at every stage, from submission to publication. The overall quality and rigor of the journal are truly commendable. I am pleased to have published my work with Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Studies, and I look forward to future opportunities for collaboration. Sincerely, Aline Tollet, UCLouvain.
Dear Ms. Mayra Duenas, Editorial Coordinator, International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. “The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews represented the “ideal house” to share with the research community a first experience with the use of the Simeox device for speech rehabilitation. High scientific reputation and attractive website communication were first determinants for the selection of this Journal, and the following submission process exceeded expectations: fast but highly professional peer review, great support by the editorial office, elegant graphic layout. Exactly what a dynamic research team - also composed by allied professionals - needs!" From, Chiara Beccaluva, PT - Italy.
Dear Maria Emerson, Editorial Coordinator, we have deeply appreciated the professionalism demonstrated by the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. The reviewers have extensive knowledge of our field and have been very efficient and fast in supporting the process. I am really looking forward to further collaboration. Thanks. Best regards, Dr. Claudio Ligresti
Dear Chrystine Mejia, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of Neurodegeneration and Neurorehabilitation. “The peer review process was efficient and constructive, and the editorial office provided excellent communication and support throughout. The journal ensures scientific rigor and high editorial standards, while also offering a smooth and timely publication process. We sincerely appreciate the work of the editorial team in facilitating the dissemination of innovative approaches such as the Bonori Method.” Best regards, Dr. Matteo Bonori.
I recommend without hesitation submitting relevant papers on medical decision making to the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I am very grateful to the editorial staff. Maria Emerson was a pleasure to communicate with. The time from submission to publication was an extremely short 3 weeks. The editorial staff submitted the paper to three reviewers. Two of the reviewers commented positively on the value of publishing the paper. The editorial staff quickly recognized the third reviewer’s comments as an unjust attempt to reject the paper. I revised the paper as recommended by the first two reviewers.
Dear Maria Emerson, Editorial Coordinator, Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. Thank you for publishing our case report: "Clinical Case of Effective Fetal Stem Cells Treatment in a Patient with Autism Spectrum Disorder" within the "Journal of Clinical Research and Reports" being submitted by the team of EmCell doctors from Kyiv, Ukraine. We much appreciate a professional and transparent peer-review process from Auctores. All research Doctors are so grateful to your Editorial Office and Auctores Publishing support! I amiably wish our article publication maintained a top quality of your International Scientific Journal. My best wishes for a prosperity of the Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. Hope our scientific relationship and cooperation will remain long lasting. Thank you very much indeed. Kind regards, Dr. Andriy Sinelnyk Cell Therapy Center EmCell
Dear Editorial Team, Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions. It was truly a rewarding experience to work with the journal “Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions”. The peer review process was insightful and encouraging, helping us refine our work to a higher standard. The editorial office offered exceptional support with prompt and thoughtful communication. I highly value the journal’s role in promoting scientific advancement and am honored to be part of it. Best regards, Meng-Jou Lee, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, National Taiwan University Hospital.
Dear Editorial Team, Journal-Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, “Publishing my article with Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions has been a highly positive experience. The peer-review process was rigorous yet supportive, offering valuable feedback that strengthened my work. The editorial team demonstrated exceptional professionalism, prompt communication, and a genuine commitment to maintaining the highest scientific standards. I am very pleased with the publication quality and proud to be associated with such a reputable journal.” Warm regards, Dr. Mahmoud Kamal Moustafa Ahmed
Dear Maria Emerson, Editorial Coordinator of ‘International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews’, I appreciate the opportunity to publish my article with your journal. The editorial office provided clear communication during the submission and review process, and I found the overall experience professional and constructive. Best regards, Elena Salvatore.
Dear Mayra Duenas, Editorial Coordinator of ‘International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews Herewith I confirm an optimal peer review process and a great support of the editorial office of the present journal
Dear Editorial Team, Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions. I am really grateful for the peers review; their feedback gave me the opportunity to reflect on the message and impact of my work and to ameliorate the article. The editors did a great job in addition by encouraging me to continue with the process of publishing.
Dear Cecilia Lilly, Editorial Coordinator, Endocrinology and Disorders, Thank you so much for your quick response regarding reviewing and all process till publishing our manuscript entitled: Prevalence of Pre-Diabetes and its Associated Risk Factors Among Nile College Students, Sudan. Best regards, Dr Mamoun Magzoub.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is a high quality journal that has a clear and concise submission process. The peer review process was comprehensive and constructive. Support from the editorial office was excellent, since the administrative staff were responsive. The journal provides a fast and timely publication timeline.
Dear Maria Emerson, Editorial Coordinator of International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews, What distinguishes International Journal of Clinical Case Report and Review is not only the scientific rigor of its publications, but the intellectual climate in which research is evaluated. The submission process is refreshingly free of unnecessary formal barriers and bureaucratic rituals that often complicate academic publishing without adding real value. The peer-review system is demanding yet constructive, guided by genuine scientific dialogue rather than hierarchical or authoritarian attitudes. Reviewers act as collaborators in improving the manuscript, not as gatekeepers imposing arbitrary standards. This journal offers a rare balance: high methodological standards combined with a respectful, transparent, and supportive editorial approach. In an era where publishing can feel more burdensome than research itself, this platform restores the original purpose of peer review — to refine ideas, not to obstruct them Prof. Perlat Kapisyzi, FCCP PULMONOLOGIST AND THORACIC IMAGING.
Dear Grace Pierce, International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews I appreciate the opportunity to review for Auctore Journal, as the overall editorial process was smooth, transparent and professionally managed. This journal maintains high scientific standards and ensures timely communications with authors, which is truly commendable. I would like to express my special thanks to editor Grace Pierce for his constant guidance, promt responses, and supportive coordination throughout the review process. I am also greatful to Eleanor Bailey from the finance department for her clear communication and efficient handling of all administrative matters. Overall, my experience with Auctore Journal has been highly positive and rewarding. Best regards, Sabita sinha
Dear Mayra Duenas, Editorial Coordinator of the journal IJCCR, I write here a little on my experience as an author submitting to the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews (IJCCR). This was my first submission to IJCCR and my manuscript was inherently an outsider’s effort. It attempted to broadly identify and then make some sense of life’s under-appreciated mysteries. I initially had responded to a request for possible submissions. I then contacted IJCCR with a tentative topic for a manuscript. They quickly got back with an approval for the submission, but with a particular requirement that it be medically relevant. I then put together a manuscript and submitted it. After the usual back-and-forth over forms and formality, the manuscript was sent off for reviews. Within 2 weeks I got back 4 reviews which were both helpful and also surprising. Surprising in that the topic was somewhat foreign to medical literature. My subsequent updates in response to the reviewer comments went smoothly and in short order I had a series of proofs to evaluate. All in all, the whole publication process seemed outstanding. It was both helpful in terms of the paper’s content and also in terms of its efficient and friendly communications. Thank you all very much. Sincerely, Ted Christopher, Rochester, NY.
