These topics will be used to find the right expert to peer review your case, and will be used if the case is published to link it to similar cases Case load We would like to know the approximate number patients your practice or clinic sees with the condition described; this will be important for the peer reviewers, for example, a primary care practitioner will have a different approach from a neurologist to a patient with multiple sclerosis Summary not needed for Images in
These topics will be used to find the right expert to peer review your case, and will be used if the case is published to link it to similar cases Case load We would like to know the approximate number patients your practice or clinic sees with the condition described; this will be important for the peer reviewers, for example, a primary care practitioner will have a different approach from a neurologist to a patient with multiple sclerosis Summary not needed for Images in You can cut and paste this from your Word template.
Please provide up to words highlighting the most important aspects of the case presentation and outcome Competing interests Please read this advice carefully Acknowledgements You will then be asked to upload your completed Word template as well as any images and multimedia files.
Format for Images We encourage you to submit all relevant images and there is no restriction on the use of colour. Please only submit images of affected areas to preserve patient anonymity.
Cropping should be as tight as possible, to eliminate unwanted detail. We accept images in the following formats; jpg, tiff, gif, PowerPoint and eps.
All black and white images should be saved to a minimum of dpi. Colour images should be saved and supplied as a high quality file to a minimum of dpi. Colour images should not exceed 2MB at a minimum resolution of dpi.
If you choose a higher resolution your image dimension should be reduced accordingly to keep the file under 2MB. Scanners may automatically increase image size at a higher resolution.
Multimedia and Supplemental files You may submit video and other files to enhance your case report video files should be supplied as. When submitting video files, you must complete the "video caption" box in Case Report template. You may also submit supplementary material to support the submission and review of your article, e.
When submitting video files, ensure you upload them using the File Designation "Video Files". For mutation nomeclature please use the nomenclature guidelines suggested by the Human Genome Variation Society http: We encourage the submission of all variants to publicly accessible databases.
Competing interests A competing interest exists when professional judgement concerning a primary interest such as patients' welfare or the validity of research may be influenced by a secondary interest such as financial gain or personal rivalry. It may arise for the authors of an article when they have a financial interest that may influence, probably without their knowing, their interpretation of their results or those of others.
We believe that, to make the best decision on how to deal with a paper, we should know about any financial competing interest that authors may have. We are not aiming to eradicate competing interests; they are almost inevitable.
We will not reject cases simply because you have a competing interest, but we will make a declaration on whether you have competing interests. For all manuscripts please provide a statement describing any relevant interests of all authors in the appropriate box on submission for guidance on relevant competing interests read the BMJ declaration.
We also ask reviewers to provide statements of competing interests, and we use these when assessing the value of peer review. Intellectual property rights On submission the Corresponding Author will be asked to agree the following terms and conditions: The Corresponding Author has the right to assign on behalf of all authors and does assign on behalf of all authors, a full assignment of all intellectual property rights for all content within the submitted case report other than as agreed with the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd in any media known now or created in the future, and permits this case report if accepted to be published on BMJ Case Reports and to be fully exploited within the remit of the assignment as set out in the assignment which has been read http: Plagiarism detection BMJ takes publication ethics very seriously and abides by the best practice guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics.
BMJ is a member of CrossCheck by CrossRef and iThenticate which is a plagiarism screening service that verifies the originality of content submitted before publication.
Authors, researchers and freelancers can also use iThenticate to screen their work before submission by visiting www. Every article is screened on submission and any that is deemed to overlap more than trivially with other publications will be rejected automatically with no right of appeal.Systematic reviews traditionally answer an empirical question based on an unbiased assessment of all the empirical studies that address it.
Such reviews emerged in the s in social science and were developed to a high level of sophistication in medicine and epidemiology. Peer review of study protocols. BMJ Open will consider publishing without peer review protocols that have formal ethical approval and funding from a recognised, case-control, and cross-sectional studies (combined) (Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols) is a new reporting guideline.
BMJ Case Reports is an important educational resource that offers a high volume of cases across all disciplines.
Here, you will find information about what cases we want to publish, how to prepare your manuscript, and details of our submission, peer review and publication processes.
We want to. A systematic literature review attempts ‘to identify, appraise and synthesize all the empirical evidence that meets pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a given research question’ (Cochrane definition, ). A systematic review of validation studies is therefore helpful, with meta-analysis needed to summarise the predictive performance of the model being validated across different settings and populations.
Advice on how to write a systematic review. JM Wardlaw. 14 January th How to write a paper – systematic review Note please see “Advice on how to write a paper” for information on general aspects of manuscript preparation, which should be read before you start to write up your systematic review.