AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2637-8914/345
1Department of Pharmacy, University of Karachi, Pakistan.
2GD Pharmaceutical Inc OPJS University Rajasthan India.
3Assistant Professor Department of Pathology Dow University of Health Sciences.
*Corresponding Author: Rehan Haider, 1Department of Pharmacy, University of Karachi, Pakistan.
Citation: Rehan Haider, Geetha Kumari Das, Hina Abbas, (2026), Comprehensive Examination of Publishing Practices in Clinical Studies: Ethical Considerations, Bias Assessment, and Future Directions, J. Nutrition and Food Processing, 9(1); DOI:10.31579/2637-8914/345
Copyright: © 2026, Rehan Haider. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 09 December 2025 | Accepted: 26 December 2025 | Published: 05 January 2026
Keywords: clinical studies; publishing; evidence based- practice; randomized control trails
Publishing dispassionate studies plays an important part in advancing healing information and reconstructing patient care. These studies, transported to judge the security and efficacy of healing attacks, circumscribe an expansive range of methods and are essential for evidence-based practice. The process of issuing dispassionate studies includes various key steps, from study design and dossier group to analysis and distribution of judgments. The key dispute is the way that "clinical tests," "randomized controlled troubles," and "meta-study" mean differing types of clinical studies. Each type serves a specific purpose in donating to the evidence base for healing mediations. Additionally, agreements like "peer review," "chronicle compliance," and "open access" climax the significance of severe judgment and approachability of published research. Ethical concerns are principal in the news of clinical studies, guaranteeing patient security, confidentiality, and cognizant consent. Adherence to moral directions, to a degree those defined by institutional review boards and supervisory bulks, is owned by upholding the purity and believeableness of published research. Moreover, the distribution of study verdicts through information allows healthcare pros to stay cognizant of the latest growth in their field. This eases conversant administration concerning patient care and contributes to continuous healing instruction.
In conclusion, issuing clinical studies is elemental to the advancement of healing skills and the bettering of patient consequences. Through severe research, ethical conduct, and extensive distribution, clinical studies drive progress in healthcare and shape the future of cure.
This study aims to address three primary objectives. Firstly, it delves into the ethical considerations and desirability surrounding the publication of clinical trials, along with an exploration of potential biases inherent in this process. Secondly, it provides insights for younger clinical trialists by discussing the traditional components of an orthodox clinical trial report within a peer-reviewed journal, as well as offering guidance for effective oral presentations. Lastly, it explores alternative forms of publication, including isolated abstracts, posters, electronic publications, and press releases. It's important to note that this study's scope is limited to formal publication, excluding regulatory documents—which are typically not published—and marketing materials, which are covered elsewhere. Additionally, while the term 'publishing' may encompass electronic submissions to regulatory authorities, this subject is beyond the scope of this study and may be addressed in a separate investigation. The study concludes with a summary and a prospectus for future research in this area.
Ethics in Publishing Clinical trials
For all forms of publication, the objective usually goes beyond the mere reporting of clinical trials data. In some way or another, the pharmaceutical the physician will interpret his or her data to reach conclusions, and will want to urge some change in the behavior of the target audience. These changes might include prescribing habits, healthcare resource utilization, public health policy or regulatory practices. Whatever the form of publication, the only tools available to persuade people to make these behavioral changes are the well-created document, audiovisual presentation, press release, and so on. Often, the actual dissemination of these materials takes place at a time or place remote from the writer’s supervision. Publications must be well-made for stand-alone use.
Conclusions that extrapolate beyond the range of available data are as inappropriate for scientific publications, and nor do they belong in regulatory documents or marketing materials. Omissions of details in methods and results under a concise presentation will always be subjective, and there is a close link between the appropriateness of this subjectivity and the integrity of the author(s). The pressures on the clinical trialist, whether writing himself or herself, or when guiding specialist medical writers, are many, sometimes contrary to common standards of integrity, and often emanate from powerful people who lack the training needed to assess data objectively. Such people will include journalists who oversimplify or sensation analyze, marketing department staff wanting to amplify positive messages and silence negative ones, and corporate officers who want to use publications as vehicles for enhancing the share price or negotiating better financial arrangements on Wall Street. Rarely, even government politicians get involved, whose tactics include those used by journalists, the diligent application of complete ignorance, and the forced fit of technical information to a predetermined political position.
The publication of clinical trials, then, is one an example where the clinical trialist (acting as publist or medical writer) may become an agent for social change (Gray, 1994). Even when he or she acts solely as a medical writer, author physician must understand their ethical responsibility to represent the material in a fair, balanced, and, above all, accurate manner. While an ombudsman-like role may help in finding compromise among the various pressures that are applied to this process from diverse outside parties, the author of a clinical trial the report may inevitably (but hopefully only occasionally) find himself or herself as the sole repository of integrity in this process; this can feel lonely, but nobody else is going to fulfill this role.
The desirability of, and biases in, the publication of clinical trials Everybody finds the publication of an ideal clinical trial to be highly desirable. Clinical development departments find it efficient to mail out reprints in response to clinicians’ inquiries and to append them to Investigators’ Brochures and IND amendments. Regulators controlling promotional practices need only satisfy themselves that the publication accurately reflects the report that has been submitted to the approved PLA or NDA. Marketing departments can use this publication for promotional purposes, knowing that the data is cast iron, the message is unarguably positive, and that the self-evident benefits of the drug will be understood by the most skeptical clinician meeting the least adept salesperson. Lastly, senior management can bask in the glory of its contribution to public health, and direct observers on Wall Street to the appearance of its clinical trials in the world’s most respected medical journals. For small companies, this might even be life-saving. How on earth could such a laudable activity go wrong? The answer, of course, lies in the the fact that many clinical trials are less than ideal candidates for publication. This poor publication candidates may be trials that did not result in a positive outcome or those that generated data about some prosaic aspects of drug action (e.g. tolerability in a special population). Studies reply creating a positive finding are often regulatory requirement, but me-too papers do not find homes in prominent journals. Lastly, some good studies are less than ideal publication candidates solely because the manuscript has been drafted badly.
Negative trials are rarely accepted for publication by good journals unless their results seriously dispel some previously held belief, or contradict previously published studies. Some areas of therapeutics are notorious for the high proportion of negative clinical trial results (e.g. pharmacological treatments for depression). However, the majority of negative clinical trials are those where either drug efficacy is simply not evident or where no difference is found between two active treatments. Negative data are the inevitable result of conducting clinical trials that are true experiments; there is nothing dishonorable in such a result, even if it is disappointing. However, the failure to publish such studies risks waste of further resources and duplication of the patient hazard, and an independent study group to discover later the same negative result. Chalmers (1990) [1], somewhat hyperbolically, has characterized the underreporting of clinical trial data as scientific misconduct. If this underreporting is suboptimal, then those who publish clinical trials must take their share of the blame. Incongruously, it is the same journal editors who have traditionally been least likely to publish negative data that are making the most noise about the unsatisfactory performance of the pharmaceutical industry in failing to publish the data (Horton and Smith, 1999; Tonks, 1999) [2,3].
This author cannot agree with Dickersin et al. (1992) [4] who wrote: ‘Contrary to popular opinion, publication bias originates primarily with investigators, not journal editors:..’ because the busy clinical trialist is unlikely to waste his or her time writing a paper that he or she knows has little chance of being published.The establishment of clinical trial registries maybe one way to overcome the bias against reporting of negative clinical trials. This is not a new idea (. Simes, 1986) [5] and several worthwhile attempts have been made to accomplish this. The National Health Service in the United Kingdom (Peckham, 1991) [6], an amnesty for the publication of clinical trials offered by some journals (Roberts,1998),[7] and specialized databases (especially in the areas of malignant disease and AIDS) have been partial responses to the many pleas for registration of clinical trials. Two large pharmaceutical companies have taken the initiative to register their own clinical trials (. Sykes, 1998) [8], but have been ungratefully criticized both for doing too much and for doing too little: some think that the registered information is insufficient, whereas others believe that this creates a commercial disadvantage (Horton and Smith, 1999).
A further bias in clinical trials publishing is the selective reporting of subsets of secondary end points. This is usually associated with active comparator trials having a primary objective of demonstrating the superiority of one treatment over the other. All too often, the primary objective of the trial is not achieved: the authors then selectively publish a few of the many secondary end points that did support their hypothesis. The ‘if you have 100 endpoints and a ¼ 0:05, then, at random,5 endpoints will be statistically significant principle supervenes; fallacious treatment differences are claimed after reporting only those five endpoints. Solutions to this problem could include an independently prepared summary of the protocol, with its prospective objectives and complete list of endpoints, perhaps in mini-type, at the end of such papers, as well as sensitization of reviewers to this potential problem. Journal editors sometimes approach this ideal by asking for protocols to accompany the submitted manuscripts; some companies view their protocols as confidential, and one wonders whether this is one of the reasons why. Thus, there are multiple ways in which publication bias may be created by study sponsors, pub lists, medical writers, and those who control journal content. Clinical trial registries still do not exist in any comprehensive fashion. Those constructing meta-analyses from published studies should beware.
The classic components of a clinical trial report in a peer-reviewed journal
The publication of clinical trials in peer-reviewed journals normally follow the same format as for any other paper: title, authors, sponsorship, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, concluding paragraph, acknowledgments, references, tables and figure legends, with each figure attached to a separate sheet labeled on the reverse. The overall philosophy is also the same as for any other paper, namely that there should be enough information for the study to be replicated in independent hands, should the need arise? It is beyond the scope of this study to teach how to write a scientific paper: there are many other books, manuals and journals that can devote enough space for this pose (Skelton, 1994; Bonk, 1997; Fromter et al., 1999)9,10,11}. All journals publish guidelines describing the formats for the often-diverse types of articles that will be considered. The corollary is that the writer should identify the target journal before putting pen to paper, and judge whether the quantity of material supports a whole paper, a brief report or even more than one paper.
Authorship on papers is a matter of substantial debate. Under some circumstances, dozens of coauthors will clamor to be listed, and this phenomenon is not restricted to the publication of huge multicenter clinical trials. Clinical trials are a specific case of this general, perennial problem, to which Rafal (1991) [12] has provided a somewhat humorous guide. There are two solutions.
The first solution is the prospective promulgation of a set of criteria that every author must meet. Many journals publish their specific guidelines or criteria, and these do not differ greatly in qualitative terms. In the practicality of publishing clinical trials, the following would be typical:
A hybrid variant is also sometimes used, where a one (or a few) lead author(s) is named and stated to represent the rest of the team (e.g. Cady et al., 1991) {14}
The advantages of this tactic are that there is at At least one person who accepts responsibility for defense of the paper after publication. A further the advantage is that this can be used to motivate investigators in multisite studies: the protocol can state that the investigator who recruits the most completed patients, without violations, will be named the first author in any publication.
Isolated abstracts and posters
An argument can be made that the isolated abstract format is not a good vehicle for the publication of clinical trials. Indeed, the inclusion and exclusion criteria in most clinical protocols alone exceed the word limit of most journal article abstracts. Too often, the publication of an abstract or poster is a criterion used by companies to justify the time and expense of sending staff to a conference: authors then generate and submit unimportant abstracts, principally for use as tickets to venues that attract them for ulterior reasons. There are a few exceptions to this generalization, however. Legitimate retrospective analysis of the database of a clinical trial that has been previously published in full sometimes can make an isolated abstract provided the full reference is provided, and an educated audience at, say, an academic conference, will be aware of the potential biases of this technique. Similarly, the open-label tolerability extension to a previously published controlled trial might be usefully published as a poster. But these are minor exceptions to the general principle that to assess the validity of a clinical trials report, far more detail is needed than be published in the small spaces of isolated abstracts and posters.
Audiovisual presentations at academic meetings It is amazing that intelligent people often attempt to speak to their peers at academic meetings with (a) disorganized speech (due to disordered thought processes and/or acute episodic dysarthria) and (b) an inability to control a Powerpoint1 projector that should by now have universally replaced the former chaos they created with 200 200 photographic slides. This ineptitude is displayed by all medical specialties (including clinical trialists), by most other nonmedical professions, and has shown no sign of improvement during the past three decades. One’s amazement is all the greater because these incompetent speakers must often have heard equally bad productions, and today’s projector controls are simpler than an hotel alarm clock. The most important time when making oral publications are before you even begin the talk. You should have the following three things since qua non:
For the actual talk itself, one useful checklist is as follows:
Newer forms of clinical trials Publications
Electronic publishing is relatively new and is not still in some patterned form. It is mainly to learn, however, the main classes of photoelectric broadcast, before attractive the great step of delivering your dispassionate trial report to it. Only therefore can the main question be solved for that dispassionate trial:
Would electronic brochures form this dossier more surely feasible to the hearing that can best use them (Geddes, 1999) {15} The CD-ROM against the text is presumably the ultimate earliest form of the digital against parallel debate. This battle has possibly immediately existed and fought to a stop, accompanying firsts and underdogs on two sides. Example replacements involve the approximately two twelve annual books of Index Medicus, or two together 37 annual books of Headache and 17 annual volumes of Cephalalgia, by alone CD-ROM disks. This substitute saves saplings, speeds search periods, and has lower production and transportation expenses, but demands lectors to have an approach to calculating at the unchanging place as the disk. Clinical trial databases may in a kindly manner established on CD-ROM, and this can simplify explorations further the anticipated trial objectives. Epidemio-probable studies, place immense numbers of inmates are frequently studied, concede the possibility be particularly adapted to this form of newspaper.
Many usual journals have sprouted electronic limbs. The lowest form now is possibly the disposal of photoelectric facsimiles of printed documents, mostly in PDF plan that maybe read utilizing Adobe1 Acrobat1 spreadsheet that may be downloaded free. Access to these faces 5 is usually limited to those the one again have a authorization of the paper interpretation of the journal and accordingly shows a reproduction of or enlargement to paper advertisement, alternatively its substitute.
In a few cases, journals issue electronically a more off-course pick of submitted documents than maybe sustained in their paper forms, or confined new electronic material to agree that does not perform in print (Chalmers, 1999; Delamothe and Smith, 1999; McConnell and Horton, 1999). Song and others. (1999) {16,17,18,19} have submitted that photoelectric journals can reduce disclosure bias (visualize above) mainly by being considerate and providing an approach to greater quantities of written matters. Chalmers (1999, and visualize above) is a fan, so reasonably this is correct. Chalmers and Altman (1999) {20} have even proposed that not only will tavern location bias be deprived of but still that the inborn character of clinical tests themselves maybe upgraded on account of photoelectric information; this remains expected confirmed. However, this increased book of newspapers also orders a various peer-review order, or even no peer-review by any means. It is attainable that electronic booklets grant permission to happen expected doubtful as both provide taller quantities of facts but perhaps accompanying lower features than more orthodox broadcasts.
Press releases
Pharmaceutical physicians in large pharmaceutical companies will only very rarely be exposed to the need for press releases concerning their clinical trials. In contrast, the small entrepreneurial pharmaceutical company may live or die on the outcome of a single clinical trial. The rapid dissemination of the results of such a clinical trial to the appropriate audience (shareholders and investment community) is legally required when material to the prospects of a small, public company. The press release then becomes an important tool for publishing clinical trial results.
When writing press releases, absolutely no technical knowledge can be assumed on the part of the recipient. Often their questions parse simply to ‘Did the drug work or not?’ Extended detailed explanations can create the false impression that the drug did not work, when in fact the trial outcome was quite satisfactory for product registration purposes. Equally, when clinical trials fail, ingenious but scientifically meaningless explanations by corporate officers can create the false impression that the outcome was better than it was. A good example is the often used: ‘We still have confidence in our ability to register Drug X; Drug X performed as we expected, but it was just that the placebo response the rate in this [pivotal] study was unexpectedly high.’ Clinical trialists may often want to avoid involvement in the drafting of press releases altogether. However, this creates a liability that one’s independent comments may not then dovetail with the company’s press releases, causing harm not only to the company but also one’s longevity within it! The best advice on press releases may be two-fold. First, avoid scientific nuance and technical detail. State clearly whether or not the primary objective of the clinical trial was met. Whichever the case, then state clearly the implications of these data to the clinical development plan: if it needs redirection, state what that redirection is, and the implication for the registration timeline.
Copyright
Copyright exists to prevent the exploitation of a publication (or trademark) by anyone other than the publisher. This protection of the right to exploit a publication is central to the promotion of publishing per se, and thus an incentive to disseminate free speech. In most developed countries, copyrights can exist in two forms. First, for a fee, the protected publication can be registered with the national office of copyright. Second, the copyright holder can simply assert in the publication ownership of copyright under the Common Law. Both forms may use the familiar # symbol. The registered copyright is easier to enforce in court because the date of registration and priority of the first publisher are on independent record and can be compared to the behavior of the alleged infringer. The Common Law alternatives can also be legally enforced, but requires the development of a set of evidence; an infringer usually has at least an initial defense that due search of the national register failed to locate the alleged infringed copyright.
It is a peculiar and remarkable aspect of academic journals that their publishers make a profit while receiving almost all their copy entirely for free. Almost all journals require the transfer of copyright from authors to the publisher upon acceptance of submitted manuscripts. Technically, this requires that an author needs specific permission from the publisher to use his manuscript later; in practice, this permission is routinely granted upon written application. A few journals now seek only exclusive licenses from authors, one condition of which preserves the author’s right to personally use his work, and which leaves copyright ownership with the author(s); the license can also become void if the publisher fails to exploit it, and can yield royalties to the authors. In practice, this license removes the administrative burden of granting routine permissions by the publisher, and royalties on the journal reprints are either nominal or absent.
But there are exceptions. Copyright for publications is not universal. In the United States, manuscripts from federal employees cannot be claimed as proprietary because their work product is deemed always to belong to the general public, whether published or not. Most journals operate a copyright exemption system for this purpose. In many Third World countries, copyright, if it exists at all, is unenforceable. Reprints disseminated for medical information or marketing purposes should be those purchased from the publisher. Alternatively, photocopying license fees can be paid, and in the United States a national clearing house exists for this purpose. Every website page can potentially be copyrighted. Few are registered, although the application of Common Law copyright is common. So far, there has been insufficient litigation to delimit the copyright aspects of electronic publishing
Ethical Considerations and Bias Assessment:
Literature Review and Case Studies:
Case Studies: To provide real-world examples, a selection of case studies from reputable sources, including peer-reviewed journals and professional organizations, were analyzed. These case studies illustrated both successful and challenging publication experiences, highlighting key issues and best practices in clinical trial publication.
Survey Design and Administration:
Data Collection and Analysis:
Quantitative Analysis: Quantitative data from the survey responses were collected using online survey platforms and analyzed using statistical software. Descriptive statistics and inferential tests were employed to identify trends and associations.
Interviews with Key Stakeholders:
Comparative Analysis of Publication Formats:
Expert Consultation and Validation:
Validation: Expert insights and recommendations were incorporated into the study report to enhance its credibility and relevance. Feedback from experts was carefully considered and used to refine the analysis and conclusions.
8. Limitations and Future Directions:
Limitations: Potential limitations of the study, including sample size constraints, self-reporting biases, and generalizability of findings, were acknowledged. Strategies for addressing limitations and mitigating potential biases in future research were discussed.
Future Directions: Opportunities for further investigation, such as longitudinal studies to track changes in publication practices over time or qualitative inquiries into specific aspects of the publication process, were identified. Recommendations for researchers and practitioners based on study findings were provided.
Alternative forms of advertisement, to a degree, private abstracts, sheets, photoelectric publications, and press releases, are debated painstakingly, peeling to rest on their part in distributing research judgments. The study stresses the importance of tailor-made ideas and approaches to reach various audiences and the dramatic impact of written research.
In conclusion, this study provides an inclusive survey of the issuing process for dispassionate studies. It underlines the need for exact devotion to ethical directions, transparency in gathering research results, and change in distribution procedures. The study decides to demand further research to survey arising currents and challenges in the active countryside of dispassionate study publication.
Summary and Prospectus
In summary, the explanation of a dispassionate trial report for use in the peer-inspected literature is much like that for some added controlled paper; it must hold most of the current fashion that would perform in the executive summary of a clinical report used for supervisory purposes. Clues for active spoken performances are too given. Systems for the location of clinical trials are now neither inclusive nor generally handy to the relevant mark hearings. Pharmaceutical companies and chronicle editors two together present magazine bias; the old is likely only to expend possessions in newsgathering, and the concluding is likely only to issue clinical trials with certain consequences. Registration of clinical trials was submitted in addition to 15 years in the past, all at once a plan for preventing the bias against news of negative tests. Some pharmaceutical U.S. state companies are origin to support aforementioned registries for their work, but no international colleague matched or supported agency has still arisen except in specific fields accompanying relatively narrow academic hearings. It is possible that photoelectric announcement can increase this situation, but, now, skilled is more expectation than proof that this is the case.
The crowning glory of this research challenge could no longer be feasible without the contributions and guidance of many individuals and agencies. we’re deeply grateful to all those who performed a position in the achievement of this mission We would also like to thank My Mentor Dr. Naweed Imam Syed Prof. Department of Cell Biology at the College of Calgary and Dr. Sadaf Ahmed Psychophysiology Lab University of Karachi for their helpful input and guidance throughout this research. Their insights and understanding had been instrumental in shaping the direction of this challenge Declaration of interest I, at this second, declare that: I haven’t any pecuniary or another private hobby, direct or oblique, in any dependence that raises or can also boost a war with my duties as a supervisor of my workplace control
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare that they have no
Conflicts of Interest.
Financial support and sponsorship
No Funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript
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.
