Peer Review Process
All manuscripts submitted to Optimal Journal of Clinical Case Report undergo an initial screening by the Editorial Team. At this stage, manuscripts are assessed for their conformity with the journal's focus and scope, completeness of submission requirements, originality, ethical compliance, and overall quality of presentation. All submissions are also screened for plagiarism and similarity. The maximum acceptable similarity index is 20%, subject to further editorial evaluation of the nature and source of the similarity.
Manuscripts that do not comply with the journal's scope, ethical requirements, author guidelines, or minimum standards for clinical case reporting may be rejected during the initial editorial screening without being sent for external peer review.
Manuscripts that pass the initial screening will be evaluated by at least two independent peer reviewers with relevant expertise in the clinical area of the submitted case. Optimal Journal of Clinical Case Report applies a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of the authors are concealed from the reviewers and the identities of the reviewers are concealed from the authors.
The peer-review process considers the following aspects:
- Relevance of the manuscript to the journal's focus and scope.
- Originality and clinical significance of the reported case.
- Clarity and completeness of the case presentation.
- Appropriateness of the diagnostic assessment and clinical reasoning.
- Appropriateness of therapeutic interventions or clinical management.
- Adequacy of follow-up and reporting of patient outcomes.
- Scientific validity and consistency between clinical findings, discussion, and conclusions.
- Educational value and contribution of the case to clinical knowledge or practice.
- Compliance with ethical principles, including patient informed consent and confidentiality.
- Quality, relevance, and adequacy of the references.
- Compliance with applicable clinical case reporting standards, including the CARE Guidelines, where appropriate.
Reviewers provide recommendations and constructive comments to assist the Editor in evaluating the manuscript and to help authors improve the quality of their work. Reviewers may recommend acceptance, minor revision, major revision, resubmission, or rejection.
Reviewer comments and editorial recommendations are communicated to the corresponding author. Authors are expected to revise the manuscript and provide a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments within the specified period.
The revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary. The Editor and Editorial Board will consider the reviewers' recommendations, the authors' responses, and the overall quality and ethical compliance of the manuscript before making the final decision.
The Editor-in-Chief or designated Editor has the final authority regarding the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts submitted to Optimal Journal of Clinical Case Report.
