A case report is a description of important scientific observations that are missed or undetectable in clinical trials. This includes a rare or unusual clinical condition, a previously unreported or unrecognized disease, unusual side effects to therapy or response to treatment, and unique use of imaging modalities or diagnostic tests to assist diagnosis of a disease. Generally, a case report sh...

Peer review is a critical component of the scientific process. When conducted properly by dedicated and competent reviewers, it helps to safeguard quality, validity, authority rigour academic work. However, bias in peer well documented can skew objectivity hinder fair assessment research. To mitigate against enhance accountability, IOP Publishing has introduced two different, but complementary,...

Few cases of hydatid disease have been reported in India. The general impression is that the disease is rare. It is only occasionally that cases appear in the hospitals in large towns, and even these very often are not clearly brought out in hospital reports. The provincial annual reports in India show no separate heading for hydatid disease, and in hospital reports they are included under tumo...

Copyright © 2013 by Journal of Orthpaedic Case Reports Journal of Orthopaedic Case Reports | pISSN 2250-0685 | eISSN | Available on www.jocr.co.in | doi: This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction...

Journal of Intensive Care is very grateful for the generously-provided time and constructive, insightful reports provided by the journal's highly-qualified reviewers. We would like to show our appreciation by thanking the following people for their assistance with review of manuscripts for the journal in 2014.

The number of reports of clinical trials grows by hundreds every week. However, this does not mean that people making decisions about healthcare are finding it easier to obtain reliable knowledge for these decisions. Some of the information is unreliable. Systematic reviews are helping to resolve this by bringing together the research on a topic, appraising and summarising it. But the quality o...

Six months ago we acknowledged the help of many least to be more reluctant to do so in the future [8]. thousands of our reviewers who helped us with the Obviously, editors cannot afford such a loss of expert editorial decision process over the last 5 years [1]. The aim knowledge, if they aim at peer review of the large majority of editors is two-fold: they wish to make fair decisions, but of th...

Aberer, K. Al-Naemi, S. Anand, S. Andersson, M. Aye, L. Balsters, H. Bergmann, A. Berse, H. Berveghieri, D. Bettini, C. Bichler, P. Biliris, A. Blanken, H.M. Bode, T. Boehm, K. Boueehna, 0. Branding, H. Bressan, S. Breunig, M. Brodsky, A. Burgard, W. Busse, R. Butleris, R. Castellanos, M. Ciferri, R.R. Collet, C. Connor, R. Cutts, Q. de Cambray, B. Doherty, M. Dong, G. dos Santos, C.S. Dupont, ...