Publication Ethics

Optimal Journal of Clinical Case Report is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics and takes all reasonable measures to prevent publication malpractice. The Editorial Board is responsible for ensuring the integrity, transparency, and ethical quality of all manuscripts published in the journal.

Unethical publishing behavior, including plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and violations of patient confidentiality, is unacceptable.

Authors submitting manuscripts to Optimal Journal of Clinical Case Report must ensure that their work is original, has not been previously published in whole or in part, and is not simultaneously under consideration by another journal. For clinical case reports involving identifiable patients, authors must ensure that appropriate informed consent for publication has been obtained and that patient privacy and confidentiality are adequately protected.

Editors, authors, and reviewers of Optimal Journal of Clinical Case Report are expected to follow good publication practices and fulfill their respective ethical responsibilities in accordance with the principles and guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

COPE guidelines and Core Practices are available at:
https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines

Section A: Publication and Authorship

All manuscripts submitted to Optimal Journal of Clinical Case Report are subject to a peer-review process conducted by reviewers with appropriate expertise in the relevant clinical or scientific field.
The journal applies a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from each other during the review process.
Manuscripts are evaluated based on their relevance to the journal's scope, scientific and clinical validity, originality, significance, clarity, ethical compliance, educational value, and quality of presentation.
Editorial decisions may include acceptance, acceptance with minor or major revisions, resubmission for further review, or rejection.
An invitation to revise and resubmit a manuscript does not guarantee its eventual acceptance.
Manuscripts that have been formally rejected will not normally be reconsidered unless otherwise determined by the Editorial Board under exceptional circumstances.
Acceptance of manuscripts is subject to applicable legal and ethical requirements, including copyright, plagiarism, confidentiality, informed consent, and publication ethics.
The same manuscript or substantially similar content must not be published in more than one journal.
Clinical case reports must protect patient confidentiality and must not disclose identifiable patient information without appropriate consent.
Any images, photographs, diagnostic results, or other materials that may reveal a patient's identity must only be published when appropriate consent has been obtained and ethical requirements have been fulfilled.

Section B: Authors’ Responsibilities

Authors must ensure that the submitted manuscript represents their original work.
Authors must confirm that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere, except where disclosure and appropriate justification have been provided to the Editor.
Authors must confirm that the manuscript is not simultaneously under consideration by another journal.
Authors must participate appropriately in the peer-review process and respond to reviewers' and editors' comments in a professional and timely manner.
Authors are responsible for correcting significant errors or inaccuracies identified in their manuscripts, including after publication.
All individuals listed as authors must have made substantial contributions to the conception, preparation, interpretation, writing, or critical revision of the manuscript and must approve the final version.
Authors must ensure that all clinical information, observations, diagnostic findings, interventions, and outcomes reported in the manuscript are accurate and authentic.
Authors must disclose any financial, professional, institutional, or personal conflicts of interest that could influence the manuscript.
Authors must appropriately acknowledge and cite all sources used in preparing the manuscript.
Authors must promptly inform the Editor if they discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their published article.
Authors must obtain informed consent for publication from the patient, parent, legal guardian, or authorized representative when required.
Authors must protect patient privacy and confidentiality and avoid including unnecessary identifying information in the manuscript.
Authors must ensure that photographs, radiological images, laboratory data, pedigrees, or other materials do not reveal patient identity unless explicit consent for publication has been obtained.
Where applicable, authors must provide information regarding ethical approval or explain why formal ethical approval was not required for the reported clinical case.
Authors must disclose all relevant sources of funding or financial support related to the preparation of the manuscript.

Section C: Reviewers’ Responsibilities

Reviewers must treat all manuscripts and related information as confidential and privileged material.
Reviews must be conducted objectively and professionally without personal criticism of the authors.
Reviewers should provide clear, constructive, and evidence-based comments to assist editors in making decisions and authors in improving their manuscripts.
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been appropriately cited by the authors.
Reviewers should inform the Editor-in-Chief of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and other published or submitted work of which they are aware.
Reviewers must decline to review manuscripts when they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, institutional, personal, or other relationships with the authors or institutions involved.
Reviewers should evaluate whether clinical case reports provide sufficient clinical information, diagnostic reasoning, management, outcomes, and educational value.
Reviewers should notify the Editor if they identify potential ethical concerns, including possible breaches of patient confidentiality, lack of appropriate consent, plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, or other forms of misconduct.
Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained through the peer-review process for personal advantage or for purposes unrelated to the review.

Section D: Editors’ Responsibilities

Editors have the authority and responsibility to make decisions regarding the acceptance, revision, or rejection of submitted manuscripts.
Editors are responsible for maintaining the quality, integrity, relevance, and ethical standards of the journal.
Editors should consider the interests of authors, reviewers, readers, patients, and the wider scientific and clinical community when developing and improving the journal.
Editors must protect the integrity of the academic and publication record.
Editors should issue corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or other appropriate notices when significant errors or ethical problems are identified.
Editors should ensure transparency regarding funding sources and potential conflicts of interest.
Editorial decisions must be based on the manuscript's clinical relevance, originality, scientific quality, clarity, educational value, ethical compliance, and suitability for the journal's scope, without discrimination.
Editors should not reverse previous editorial decisions without valid and documented reasons.
Editors must preserve the confidentiality and anonymity required by the journal's peer-review system.
Editors must ensure that manuscripts involving patients comply with internationally accepted ethical principles, including requirements concerning informed consent, privacy, and confidentiality.
Editors should accept manuscripts only when they are reasonably satisfied with their scientific, clinical, and ethical quality.
Editors must take appropriate action when publication misconduct is suspected in either submitted or published manuscripts and should make reasonable efforts to investigate and resolve such concerns.
Decisions concerning suspected misconduct should be based on appropriate investigation and available evidence rather than unsupported allegations.
Editors must prevent conflicts of interest involving editors, editorial staff, authors, reviewers, or Editorial Board members from influencing the editorial process.
Editors must ensure that editorial decisions are made independently and are not influenced by commercial interests, advertising, sponsorship, or payment of publication fees.
Editors should follow relevant COPE guidelines when addressing allegations of plagiarism, duplicate publication, authorship disputes, data manipulation, ethical concerns, corrections, and retractions.

Section E: Patient Consent and Confidentiality

Because Optimal Journal of Clinical Case Report primarily publishes clinical case reports, protection of patients is an essential component of the journal's publication ethics.

Authors must obtain appropriate informed consent for publication from the patient or, where applicable, the patient's parent, legal guardian, or authorized representative.
Identifying information should not be published unless it is essential for scientific or clinical purposes and explicit consent has been obtained.
Patient names, initials, medical record numbers, addresses, dates of birth, or other unnecessary identifying information should not be included in manuscripts.
Images must be anonymized whenever possible. If a patient may be identifiable from an image, explicit consent for publication must be obtained.
Altering patient information solely to disguise identity must not compromise the accuracy, integrity, or clinical meaning of the case report.
Authors are responsible for retaining appropriate documentation of informed consent and providing confirmation to the journal when requested.
If there is uncertainty regarding whether consent is required, the Editorial Board may request additional documentation or clarification before the manuscript can be considered for publication.