Abstract

BackgroundCase reports are frequently published in the health care literature, however advice on preparing such reports using the "instructions to authors" pages of journals is alleged to be limited. However, to our knowledge, this has not been formally evaluated. As roles of case reports may vary according to the case and the clinical specialities, one might expect the advice to authors to vary according to journal clinical grouping.MethodsWe surveyed the current advice available to authors of case reports from 'instructions to authors' pages of a core collection of 249 journals ('Hague' list). These were examined and compared for advice or recommendation on writing case reports. Of these, 163 (65%) published case reports and provided instructions on this publication type. Data were extracted on items of style and content of case reports, using a piloted data extraction form.ResultsJournals that published case reports were grouped into medical (n = 81, 50%), surgical (n = 38, 23%) and generic or multidisciplinary (n = 44, 27%) categories. There was a difference among the medical, surgical and generic or multidisciplinary journals in the maximum number of words and pages allowed but no difference in the number of figures, tables, references, authors, abstract or synopsis, indexing or key words and consent. Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference among the three different categories of journals regarding the content of the case reports.ConclusionsOf the journals reviewed, we found that 'instructions to authors' pages provided limited and varied information for preparing a case report. There is a need for consensus, and more consistent guidance for authors of case report.

Highlights

  • Case reports are frequently published in the health care literature, advice on preparing such reports using the "instructions to authors" pages of journals is alleged to be limited

  • Case reports are frequently published in the health care literature – more than 240,000 case reports appeared in MEDLINE in the last 5 years (1997 to 2002)

  • A total of 249 journals are included in the 'Hague' list and this served as our survey sample. This core collection of journals produced by the medical information working party of the British Medical Association (BMA) is used as a selection tool for journal subscription in the United Kingdom health care sector, and as an accreditation standard for libraries serving postgraduate medical education

Read more

Summary

Methods

A total of 249 journals are included in the 'Hague' list and this served as our survey sample. The journals' "instructions to authors" posted on their websites were surveyed from September 2002 to November 2002. These were examined for advice or recommendation on writing case reports, and data were extracted on items of style and content of case reports, using a piloted data extraction form. Two of us (OS and OO) extracted the data independently and compared our findings for any discrepancies on a pilot set of 20 journals initially. This allowed us to develop an explicit coding system for data extraction. Differences in style of reporting or content of case reports between the three groups of journals were tested using chi-square for trend and Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance

Results
Background
Discussion
Methods and Results
British Medical Association Medical Information Working Party
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call