About the ASIDE Case Reports

Vision and Mission

The ASIDE Case Reports is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal committed to fostering diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility in healthcare through the detailed documentation and dissemination of clinical case studies. As an integral part of ASIDE Healthcare, the journal strives to mirror these values in all its activities and publications.

Our mission is to advance the understanding and practice of Case Reports and its subspecialties by showcasing unique, innovative, and impactful case reports. We aim to highlight the diversity of patient experiences and clinical scenarios, emphasizing health equity and the importance of addressing social determinants of health in medical practice.

Scope

The ASIDE Case Reports publishes comprehensive clinical case studies, clinical observations, and commentary across all subspecialties of Case Reports. This includes, but is not limited to, cardiology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, nephrology, pulmonology, rheumatology, and infectious diseases. We particularly value submissions that:

• Explore rare or unique clinical presentations.
• Address healthcare challenges faced by underserved populations.
• Highlight the role of social determinants of health in patient outcomes.
• Demonstrate interdisciplinary or innovative approaches to patient care.

Readership

Our readers include physicians, medical researchers, healthcare professionals, policymakers, and educators who are dedicated to creating a more equitable healthcare system. With a global reach, the ASIDE Case Reports invites submissions from around the world to foster a diverse dialogue on clinical care and equity-focused medical practices.

Open Access Policy

In alignment with our commitment to accessibility, the ASIDE Case Reports provides immediate open access to its content, ensuring that research and insights are freely available to a global audience. This policy supports the wide dissemination of knowledge and encourages the exchange of ideas without barriers.

Editorial Process

Our rigorous peer-review process ensures the publication of high-quality case reports. The journal upholds the highest standards of review, managed by an international editorial board committed to advancing medical science while promoting fairness, diversity, and inclusiveness in academic publishing.

Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The ASIDE Case Reports is dedicated to maintaining the highest ethical standards in all its publications. We adhere strictly to international guidelines for publication ethics, offering clear guidance for authors and reviewers to uphold the integrity and reliability of the research we publish.

 

 

Peer Review Policy for ASIDE Case Reports: Double-Blind Process

1. Introduction to Peer Review

1.1 What is Peer Review? Peer review is a critical process used to ensure the quality of manuscripts prior to publication. Independent experts in relevant research areas assess submissions for originality, validity, and significance to assist editorial decisions about publication suitability.

1.2 Purpose of Peer Review in ASIDE Case Reports

Peer review at ASIDE Case Reports  aims to validate the scientific accuracy and relevance of submitted manuscripts, ensuring that published research is trustworthy and contributes significantly to the field of Case Reports.

2. Types of Peer Review

2.1 Double-Blind Peer Review For ASIDE Case Reports, the double-blind peer review process is employed where both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other. This method supports a fair evaluation by minimizing bias related to the identities of authors or reviewers.

3. The Double-Blind Peer Review Process

• • 3.1 Manuscript Submission
    • Authors submit their manuscript via the ASIDE Case Reports’ submission system, ensuring that their manuscripts and supplementary files do not contain any identifying information.
    • The manuscript’s suitability for review is initially assessed by the editorial team, based on journal scope and submission guidelines.
  • 3.2 Reviewer Selection
    • The editorial team selects potential reviewers who are experts in the manuscript’s subject area. The selection process is guided by reviewer expertise, previous review history, and professional impartiality.
  • 3.3 Conducting the Review
    • Selected reviewers are invited to evaluate the manuscript based on a predefined set of criteria encompassing significance, originality, methodology, data analysis, and presentation.
    • Reviewers are required to maintain confidentiality and declare any potential conflicts of interest regarding the manuscripts they are asked to review.
  • 3.4 Reviewer Recommendations
    • Reviewers submit their recommendations, which can include acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions, or rejection.
    • Their feedback focuses on enhancing the clarity, quality, and robustness of the manuscript.
  • 3.5 Decision Making
    • The editorial team considers all reviewer feedback to make a decision on the manuscript. In cases of conflicting opinions, additional reviewers may be consulted.
  • 3.6 Revision and Re-review
    • If revisions are required, authors are asked to address the reviewers' comments and resubmit their revised manuscript. This may undergo further rounds of review to ensure all concerns are addressed adequately.
  • 3.7 Acceptance and Publication
    • Once a manuscript meets all editorial and scientific standards, it is accepted for publication. Accepted manuscripts proceed through copyediting, layout, and proofing before publication.

4. Why Utilize Double-Blind Peer Review?
   • Double-blind peer review ensures impartiality, enhancing the credibility of the research by focusing solely on the academic content and scientific merit without influence from the authors’ or reviewers’ identities.
5. Ensuring Integrity and Fairness

• • ASIDE Case Reports is committed to the integrity of our peer review process. Any attempts to circumvent the double-blind review process, such as attempts to identify authors or reviewers, should be reported and will be addressed seriously.

6. Conclusion The peer review process at ASIDE Case Reports is designed to uphold the highest standards of scientific integrity and publication quality. By implementing a rigorous and fair double-blind peer review, we strive to contribute valuable knowledge to the field of medicine.

 

Policies on Editorial Involvement and Endogeny for ASIDE Case Reports

• Policy on Editorial Involvement in Manuscripts
  • Conflict of Interest for Editorial Members

•  the Editor-in-Chief, an Associate Editor, or any editorial board member is a co-author of a submitted manuscript, they must recuse themselves from the submission and review process of that manuscript.
• In such cases, another qualified member of the editorial team who is not a co-author will be assigned to handle the manuscript's review process to ensure unbiased evaluation and decision-making.

• Decision Making and Access

• Editorial members who are co-authors will not have access to the review process or influence the decision-making for their own manuscripts. This ensures that all manuscripts are treated with impartiality and maintain the integrity of the peer review process.

 

Ethical Standards for ASIDE Case Reports

Introduction ASIDE Case Reports adhere to the code of ethics outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA), and the Think. Check. Submit. initiative. These guidelines ensure the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and fairness in all our publishing practices. This document clarifies the ethical behavior expected of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in our journals, including the authors, the editorial board, the peer reviewers, and the publisher.

1. Editorial Standards

• Ensuring Integrity: We commit to the ethical guidelines provided by COPE and ICMJE to maintain the integrity of our scholarly record.
• Fair Play: Manuscripts are evaluated for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
• Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.

2. Duties of Reviewers

• Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
• Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.
• Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
• Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
• Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

3. Duties of Authors

• Reporting Standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.
• Data Access and Retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data.
• Originality and Acknowledgment of Sources: Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited.
• Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: Authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.
• Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

4. Publishing Ethics Issues

• Monitoring/Safeguarding Publishing Ethics by Editorial Board: The editorial board follows the guidelines of COPE in aspects of publishing ethics and rectifying any misconduct.
• Guidelines for Retracting Articles: ASIDE Case Reports take the responsibility to maintain the integrity of the scientific record seriously and, in the case of confirmed misconduct, will retract the affected publication as necessary.

For further guidance, authors should refer to the principles of the "Think. Check. Submit." initiative for choosing trustworthy journals for their research.

Conclusion Our commitment to ethical practices ensures that all articles we publish adhere to the highest standards of ethical conduct in biomedical publishing. For any questions or further information, please contact the editorial office at [email protected].