O nama

Dedication to excellence

STaR-Clinic provides training for editors and reviewers and has policies on diverse aspects of peer review, especially for the adoption of appropriate models of review and processes for handling conflicts of interest, appeals and disputes that may arise in peer review. STaR-Clinic is in the process of becoming a member of the Croatian Association for Scholarly Communication (CroASC), which belongs to the Croatian Chapter of the European Association of Science Editors (EASE). STaR-Clinic editors are regularly trained in responsible publishing and they, in turn, further train university hospital staff, students and their supervisors, and peer reviewers.

All decisions on submitted manuscripts are made by journal editors in chief, who have full editorial independence in these decisions. Other editors and the Editorial office work on manuscript submission, editing and publishing the journal. The primary task of the Editorial Board is to actively search for submission, participate in the peer review, and actively contribute to the development of the journal. The Advisory Board provides strategic support to the journal and its development.

Peer review

STaR-Clinic uses peer review to obtain the advice of experts about the quality of the submissions and their relevance to the journal. OJS – and open-source, secure online system is used for manuscript submission and peer review management. All authors receive acknowledgment of manuscript submission.

All research articles are submitted to external peer review and reviewed by at least two reviewers. 

The reviewers are asked to declare their potential competing interests in relation to the submitted article. The reviewers keep the copyright of their peer reviews, which are kept in the online submission system, and also have a choice of making their identity known to the authors by signing their review report. 

The authors may suggest potential reviewers for their manuscript, provided that they do not have competing interests (joint publications and/or projects in the last five years, family and relatives, and other). The editors reserve the right to independently decide on the reviewers for individual manuscripts. The editors will also take into consideration the request from authors for excluding certain reviewers, but they deserve the right to make the final decision on the suitability of the request. Peer review of articles authored by decision-making editors (editors in chief) is conducted outside of the online submission system by a separately appointed external editor, who makes the decision on the manuscripts.

Editorial research

We are keen to better understand and improve editorial conduct, decision-making, issues related to peer review and communication of science in general. Therefore, we occasionally take part in or conduct editorial research, so that submitted manuscripts and reviewers’ reports might be used in such research. If you do not want your manuscript or your review comments entered into such a study, please let us know in your submission letter or agreement to review. Your decision to take part or not will have no effect on the editorial decision on the submitted manuscript.

Privacy policy

STaR-Clinic processes personal information related to the submitted manuscripts, and is dedicated to the protection of personal data, as outlined in STaR-Clinic Privacy statement.

Post-publication discussions

STaR-Clinic encourages post-publication debate through letters to the editor. Post-publication comments and correction will be published beside the original article to allow readers easy access to the latest version. All versions will be permanently available and linked to original publication. The journal mechanisms for correcting, revising or retracting articles after publication are guided by the COPE guidelines.

Journal management

The editors have full responsibility and independence in all editorial issues.

How STaR-Clinic gets manuscripts 

STaR-Clinic selects good quality descriptions of clinical case reports.

STaR-Clinic accepts direct submissions via the online submission system. The manuscripts are sent for an extramural review, The review process is single-blinded, i.e., the reviewers know the identity of the authors and the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers. The final decision is made by the journal editors in chief.

STaR-Clinic pays special attention to responsible, transparent and ethical publication of research reports. Publication ethics policies and responses to allegations of misconduct in relation to these polices are described in detail. We take seriously any pre-publication and post-publication allegations of misconduct.

Allegation of misconduct

STaR-Clinic follows COPE policies and flowcharts on how to handle allegations about submitted and published articles. We define serious research misconduct as fabrication, falsification and plagiarism, but also consider a spectrum of poor research practices that have an overall detrimental impact on research and needs to be recognized and corrected if necessary. Plagiarism and self-plagiarism, as well as the simultaneous submissions of the article (results) to more than one journal, are not acceptable.

All allegations of misconduct should be directed to the STaR-Clinic Research Integrity Editor, who is independent from the editors and is not involved in editorial decision-making and publication processes. The Research Integrity Editor also ensures that the journal actively promotes responsible research and publication, as well as prevents publication of articles with flawed research and/or publication misconduct, including the misconduct related to peer review and checking for text similarity of all submitted manuscripts (Plagscan or Turnitin tools). The Research Integrity Editor will respond to allegations made directly to the journal or outside the journal, in the public domain. The journal will address allegations of publication or research misconduct according to the COPE guidance, following the COPE Flowcharts, and correct the published record when necessary. When necessary, the process will involve other journals and institutions. STaR-Clinic does not have the authority for punitive actions, which are the responsibility of the institutions and employers.

Authorship and contributorship

By submitting the manuscript to the journal, the corresponding author confirms that all authors have approved its publication. Authorship declarations have to be signed by all authors, and authors declared contributions to the research are published at the end of the article.

STaR-Clinic requires that the authorship is based on substantial and intellectual contribution to research and writing. We consider that the definition of authorship from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) best reflects deserved authorship. The ICMJE recommends that authorship be based on the following 4 criteria: “1) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; and 2) Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content; and 3) Final approval of the version to be published; and 4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.” We also emphasize the ICMJE recommendation that those authors who contributed to the research should be offered to contribute to the writing of the manuscript, so that they can deserve the article authorship.

We discourage the misuse of authorship: ghost authors (those who significantly contributed to the manuscript but are not listed as authors), guest authors (giving authorship to prominent researchers to increase the “value” of the manuscript, without their contribution) and gift authorship (giving authorship to those who did not contribute to the manuscript at all).

STaR-Clinic links ORCID identifiers to the authors in the manuscript by-line.

STaR-Clinic does not consider artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies to be legitimate authors. Only legitimate authors are ultimately responsible and accountable for the contents of the work. Authors using AI in the writing process should follow these requirements:

AI should be used only to improve readability and language of the manuscript, and not to replace researcher’s tasks to interpret the data or make scientific conclusions.
AI technology should be applied with human oversight and control. The resulting text should be carefully reviewed and edited for correctness, completeness and bias.
AI-assisted technology cannot be listed as an author or co-author nor should it be cited as an author.
The use of AI should be disclosed in the manuscript. This should be in a form of a declaration statement at the end of the manuscript: Declaration of AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process: During the preparation of this work the author(s) used [NAME TOOL / SERVICE] in order to [REASON]. After using this tool/service, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the publication.” This declaration does not apply to the use of basic editing tools, such as those for checking grammar, spelling and references. If there is nothing to disclose, this declaration is not necessary.
Allegations of authorship misuse should be directed to the STaR-Clinic Research Integrity Editor and will be handled according to the COPE Flowcharts. Requests for changes in authorship before or after the publication should be directed to the editors, in a form of a letter signed by all original authors on the manuscript.

Best practices for using AI in writing research articles are available in the section on Manuscript preparation.

Complaints and appeals

STaR-Clinic considers appeals on rejected manuscripts provided that the authors can demonstrate that the decision on their manuscript was flawed or not in line with the journal’s policies. For an appeal to be considered, authors must provide a detailed point-by-point response to all the concerns raised by the reviewers or editors involved with the manuscript. The authors do not have to provide a revised manuscript during the appeal process. All decisions made on appeals are final, and the decision process could take longer than with original submissions. Appeals must be made within 30 days of the manuscript reject decision.

Complaints against journal policies or journal processes should be directed to the STaR-Clinic Research Integrity Editor, who will perform relevant investigation and audit.

Competing interests

STaR-Clinic supports transparency for reporting all financial and personal relationships that might bias the publication process. We define conflict of interests as situations in which professional judgment concerning the validity of research may be influenced by a secondary interest, such as financial gain to a researcher or its immediate family members, or intellectual passion. Perceptions of conflict of interest are considered to be actual conflicts of interest.

We ask authors to declare their possible competing interests when they submit the manuscripts, which will be shared with the reviewers and are published in the article. Funding for the research must also be declared. The declaration of competing interest is required and is published for all articles.

In order to ensure the objectivity of peer review, as well as public confidence in the published material, we ask reviewers to declare their own competing interests. Reviewers with clear conflict of interest are removed from the review process and alternative reviewers are engaged. A reviewer who is not certain about the existence of a competing interests should contact the editorial office for advice.

STaR-Clinic will also regularly disclose competing interest declarations from the Editors in Chief and Editorial office members. As the editors and Editorial Board members at STaR-Clinic are active professionals and researchers, it may happen that they would want to submit their articles to STaR-Clinic. This represents a potential conflict of interest, especially in cases of submissions from decision-making editors.

In reviewing submissions from its editors and Editorial Board or Advisory Board members, STaR-Clinic follows the guidelines for good editorial practice set by international editorial organizations, such as the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) and COPE.

Members of the Editorial Board and Advisory Board are not decision-making editors, so they do not have editorial oversight of the peer review process or access to submitted articles they are invited as a peer reviewer for a specific manuscript. Their submissions are handled by the editorial team in the same way as other submissions and the same high level of confidentiality.

As STaR-Clinic decision-making editors are active researchers, they may in rare occasions submit their articles to STaR-Clinic. The review of these manuscripts will not be handled by the submitting editor(s); the review process will be supervised and the decisions made by a senior editor who will act independently of the other editors. In some cases, the review process will be handled by an outside independent expert to minimize possible bias in reviewing submissions from editors. f any editor(s) submit(s) their article, this will be disclosed in a published article: “Firstname Surname is the [role in journal] of STaR-Clinic. To ensure that any possible conflict of interest relevant to the journal has been addressed, this article was reviewed according to best practice guidelines of international editorial organizations.”

Allegations of undisclosed conflicts of interest should be directed to the STaR-Clinic Research Integrity Editor, which will be handled according to the COPE Flowcharts.

Ethical oversight

The issues on integrity in research and publication are too diverse and large to be presented in full detail here, so we state that the STaR-Clinic fully endorses the policies and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) outlined in the Core Practice Checklist.

For medical research involving human subjects, we specifically emphasize the requirement for ethical conduct of research and protection of privacy of patients and study subjects, as defined in the latest issue of the Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects, developed by the World Medical Association. This includes mandatory registration of clinical trials in a public trail registry as a condition for manuscript submission to STaR-Clinic , as defined in the ICMJE registration policy. If the study protocol for a clinical or non-clinical study was registered, the authors must include this information in the Methods section, as well as the last section of the Abstract (“Registration”).

For studies involving human participants, we require the authors to provide proof of ethical approval or ethics waiver, with details of the relevant ethics committee (including the registry number of the approval). For studies involving human participants, we require the authors to provide information on how informed consent was obtained; for vulnerable groups, a full methodology for obtaining consent will need to be outlined. If anonymization was not possible and the participants have to be identified, we require the authors to provide the declaration that consent forms from the participants was obtained for the publication of the image or data. A template of the consent form for publication should be submitted (not the actual signed form). Although it is not possible to fully anonymise photos of individual persons, the authors should ensure that published photographs present only the area of pathology and as few facial features possible.

For studies involving personal data, a statement on how these data have been protected should be provided in the Methods section.

STaR-Clinic editors may ask authors to provide raw data for the manuscript for editorial review. Authors should also retain all raw data underlying their article for a reasonable time after publication. If authors discover a significant error of inaccuracy in the published article, they must notify the editors so that the scientific record is promptly corrected.

STaR-Clinic follows COPE guidelines on data and reproducibility. STaR-Clinic can host data on a local server, but we strongly recommend that our authors submit datasets to an appropriate public data repository that provides a DOI to the deposited material.

STaR-Clinic does not mandate repository selection. The repositories selected may be either cross-disciplinary general repositories or discipline-specific repositories that accept specific types of structured data. However, the selected data repositories should meet the following requirements:

• Allow public access to data and open licenses (CC0 and CC-BY, or their equivalents, are required in most cases) (exceptions are allowed for sensitive, human-derived data).
• Provide persistent identifiers.
• Ensure long-term preservation of the dataset.
• Allow confidential review of submitted datasets without requiring reviewers to disclose identifying information.

We require the use of reporting guidelines for case reports, CARE. Authors must submit the CARE checklist with their manuscripts.

STaR-Clinic recommends that the authors of articles with digital images make sure that modifications to the digital images are kept to the minimum and clearly indicated in the figure legend, and that all information in the image is not changed by these manipulations. Please consult the document on recommendations for handling image integrity issues from the STM Working Group about what types or image alterations are allowed and under which conditions.

STaR-Clinic is published in one, continuous volume during the year. Case reports are published as soon as they they are ready for publication, without having to wait the next volume number.

Submission of a manuscript is taken to indicate the author's commitment to publish in the STaR-Clinic if the manuscript is accepted. STaR-Clinic respects the fact that authors’ qualification works deposited in the DABAR repository may be under different types of access. STaR-Clinic also accepts submissions based on manuscripts published as preprints. Authors submitting manuscripts directly must indicate in the manuscript that the work has been presented in a preprint. If the article is published, the authors must update the information on the preprint server about the final publication. If preprints are cited in the manuscripts, such references must be clearly identified as preprints, and their publication status must be checked and corrected if needed at the time of publication in STaR-Clinic.

The copyright for all published articles remains with the author(s). STaR-Clinic publishes under CC BY 4.0 license, which means that all published articles can be: Shared (copied and redistributed in any medium or format); and/or Adapted (remixed, transformed and built upon for any purpose, including commercial).

If the authors use copyrighted or licenced materials, they must obtain and acknowledge the permission to use, reproduce or adapt such materials, and provide the documentation to the editors, as well as a relevant statement in the manuscript.

STaR-Clinic does not publish material already published in peer-reviewed platforms (except preprints). Such publication would constitute a duplicate publication. Publication of as conference abstract or presentation is not considered to be a duplicate publication. A legitimate secondary publication of material published in other journals or outlets (e.g., guidelines, statements) is allowed.

STaR-Clinic recognizes the importance of protecting the personal information collected from users in the operation of its services and taking reasonable steps to maintain the security, integrity and privacy of any information in accordance with this Privacy Policy. This Privacy Policy describes how STaR-Clinic collects and uses the personal information you provide to STaR-Clinic. It also describes the choices available to you regarding our use of your personal information and how you can access and update this information. By submitting your information to STaR-Clinic you consent to the practices described in this policy. If you are less than 18 years of age, then you must first seek the consent of your parent or guardian prior to submitting any personal information.

How we collect information 

STaR-Clinic may collect personal information from you in the following ways: (1) directly from your verbal or written input; (2) automatically through STaR-Clinic's website technologies including tracking online, such as by Web cookies (which are small text files created by websites that are stored on your computer), by smart devices, by combining data sets, by collecting data from a browser or device for use on a different computer or device, or by using algorithms to analyze a variety of data such as records of location data.

Information you provide 

The types of personal information that STaR-Clinic collects directly from you may include:

• Contact details, such as your name, email address, postal address and telephone number;
• Internet Protocol ("IP") addresses used to connect your computer to the Internet;
• Educational and professional interests;
• Tracking codes such as cookies;
• Usernames and passwords;
• Comments, feedback, posts and other content you provide to STaR-Clinic (including through a STaR-Clinic website);
• Communication preferences;
• Search history;
• Communications with other users of STaR-Clinic 's services.

Use of your information

STaR-Clinic may use your personal information in the performance of any contract we enter into with you, to comply with legal obligations, or where STaR-Clinic has a legitimate business interest in using your information to enhance the services and products we provide. Legitimate business purposes include but are not limited to one or all of the following: providing direct marketing and assessing the effectiveness of promotions and advertising; modifying, improving or personalizing our services, products and communications; detecting fraud; investigating suspicious activity and otherwise keeping our site safe and secure; and conducting data analytics.

In addition, we may use your information in the following ways (after obtaining your consent, if required):

• To provide you with information about products and services that you request from us;
• To provide you with information about other products, events and services we offer that are either (i) similar to those you have already purchased or inquired about, or (ii) entirely new products, events and services;
• For internal business and research purposes to help enhance, evaluate, develop, and create STaR-Clinic websites (including usage statistics, such as “page views”on STaR-Clinic 's websites and the products therein), products, and services;
• To notify you about changes or updates to our websites, products, or services;
• To administer our services and for internal operations, including troubleshooting, data analysis, testing, statistical, and survey purposes;
• To allow you to participate in interactive features of our service; and
• For any other purpose that we may notify you of from time to time.

Personal information will not be kept longer than is necessary for the purpose for which it was collected. This means that, unless information must be retained for legal or archival purposes, personal information will be securely destroyed, put beyond use or erased from STaR-Clinic 's systems when it is no longer required or, where applicable, following a request from you to destroy or erase your personal information.

Disclosure and sharing of your information 

STaR-Clinic will not disclose to or share your personal information with any unaffiliated third party except as follows:

• Where necessary in connection with services provided by third parties (i) who provide us with a wide range of office, administrative, information technology, production, payment, or business management services, and (ii) who are required to comply with this policy;
• Where you voluntarily provide information in response to an advertisement from a third party;
• Where your consent has been provided, with a third party such as an academic institution, school, employer, business or other entity which has provided you with access to a product or service through an integration or access code, information may be shared regarding your engagement with the service or product, results of assessments taken and other information you input into the product or service;
• Where STaR-Clinic is required to disclose personal information in response to lawful requests by public authorities and government agencies, including to meet national security or law enforcement requirements; to comply with a subpoena or other legal process; when we believe in good faith that disclosure is necessary to protect our rights, or to protect the rights, property or safety of our services, users or others; and to investigate fraud; and
• Where all or substantially all of the business or assets of the STaR-Clinic relating to our services are sold, assigned, or transferred to another entity.

If necessary, in connection with providing publishing services on behalf of third parties, such as institutions and societies, STaR-Clinic may disclose navigational and transactional information in the form of anonymous, aggregate usage statistics and demographics information that does not reveal your identity or personal information.

Cross border transfers 

STaR-Clinic may transfer your personal information outside of your country of residence for the provision of support services, such as indexing of the journal and articles in bibliographical databases. By submitting your personal information, you agree to this transfer, storing or processing of your information. We will take all steps reasonably necessary to ensure that your personal information is treated securely and in accordance with this Privacy Policy and all applicable data protection laws.

Security 

We will use appropriate physical, technical and administrative safeguards to protect your data. Access to your personal data will be restricted to only those who need to know that information and required to perform their job function. In addition, we train our employees about the importance of maintaining the confidentiality and security of your information.

Cookies 

As is true of most websites, we gather certain information automatically. This information may include IP addresses, browser type, Internet service provider ("ISP"), referring/exit pages, the files viewed on our site (e.g., HTML pages, graphics, etc.), operating system, date/time stamp, and/or clickstream data to analyze trends in the aggregate and administer the site. 

STaR-Clinic uses cookies or similar technologies to analyze trends, administer the website, track users' movements around the website, and to gather demographic information about our user base as a whole. You can control the use of cookies at the individual browser level, but if you choose to disable cookies, it may limit your use of certain features or functions on our website or services.

Your rights 

You have the right to make a written request to be informed whether or not we hold or process any of your personal information. In your written request, you may:

• Request that we provide you with details of your personal information that we process, the purpose for which it is processed, the recipients of such information, the existence of any automated decision making involving your personal information, and what transfer safeguards we have in place;
• Request that we rectify any errors in your personal information;
• Request that we delete your personal information if our continued processing of such information is not justified;
• Request that we transfer your personal information to a third party;
• Object to automated decision-making and profiling based on legitimate interests or the performance of a task in the public interest (in which event the processing will cease except where there are compelling legitimate grounds, such as when the processing is necessary for the performance of a contract between us);
• Object to direct marketing from us; and
• Object to processing for purposes of scientific, historical research and statistics.

Third-parties

STaR-Clinic 's websites or services may include links to third-party websites. In using such links, please be aware that each third-party website is subject to its own privacy and data protection policies and is not covered by our Privacy Policy. In addition, we allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our websites. These companies may be placing and reading cookies in the cookie file of the browser on your computer's hard disk or using web beacons or other technologies to collect information in the course of ads being served on this website. These companies may use information other than personal information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to these and other websites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you.

Changes to this privacy policy 

Please note that STaR-Clinic ’s Privacy Policy is reviewed periodically. STaR-Clinic reserves the right to modify its Privacy Policy at any time without notice. Any changes to the Privacy Policy will be posted on this page and will become effective on the date of posting. We encourage you to periodically review this page for the latest information on our privacy practices.

Recourse 

Any comments, complaints or questions concerning this policy or complaints or objections about our use of your personal information should be addressed by directing your comments to the Managing Editor at knjiznica@kbsplit.hr.

GUIDE FOR PEER REVIEWERS OF SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES IN STaR-Clinic 

This guide for peer reviewers was modified with permission from Marušić M, Sambunjak D, Marušić A. Guide for peer reviewers of scientific articles in the Croatian Medical Journal. Croat Med J. 2005;46:326-32 (http://www.cmj.hr/2005/46/2/15849858.pdf).

The peer review process has many imperfections and shortcomings. It is subjective and difficult to control and standardize. Critics claim that the peer review process is slow, expensive, partial, and subject to abuse. However, without peer review it would be almost impossible for editors to publish journals. Peer review is the pillar of scientific publishing, which in turn is a basis of accumulating human knowledge. 

WHY PEER REVIEW?

The first reason to do a review is academic obligation: peer review is a part of scientific publishing; whoever wants to publish must be ready to peer review. The second is the personal benefit – increasing of knowledge and awareness, strengthening professional reputation, and the third is satisfaction – scientific debate, exchange of information, fulfilling the responsibility.

Benefit of peer review for authors of the reviewed article

A good review – one that grasps to the essence of a reviewed article, keeping its clarity and simplicity at the same time – can considerably increase the scientific merit of the reviewed article. The reviewer acts as an educator: his or her suggestions and comments enrich authors’ knowledge and ability to perform research and report about it.

Benefit of peer review for reviewers

Peer review brings direct benefits to the reviewer. It is a chance for learning, a valuable source of up-to-date scientific information, and actually an exciting job. It increases the reviewer’s knowledge, brings the pleasure and beauty of scientific debate, and creates a feeling of fulfilled responsibility.

Reviewers are privileged to have an insight into the latest research and still unpublished results in their scientific field. Reviewers also build up their ability to critically assess scientific papers, which may be useful in their own professional work and development. Writing high quality reviews strengthens a reviewers’ scientific reputation. Reviewing can also be a significant part of the curriculum vitae.

WHAT IS NECESSARY FOR A GOOD PEER REVIEW?

Responsibility. A prerequisite for a good reviewer is a strong sense of responsibility towards research and their colleagues. The reviewers assess the manuscript timely, fairly, and to the best of their abilities.

Conversance with the literature. The reviewers must be thoroughly conversant with the pertinent literature and be able to apply general scientific principles to the given case report. Reviewers should also be acquainted with the guidelines for authors of the journal for which they are refereeing.

Time. Depending on the complexity of the reviewed article and relevance to the reviewer’s expertise, the time for a fair assessment of an article worth reviewing has been estimated to about three hours. Badly written articles increase the time needed for a review.

Knowing the journal. Different journals have different publishing priorities, review policies, and rejection rates. A good peer reviewer should know these aspects of the journal, so that the review process could identify the best articles for the journal.

Our reviewers should keep it in mind while doing the reviews (Box 1).

HOW TO REVIEW A MANUSCRIPT

The first principle is to be respectful but resolute. This entails demanding explanations, arguments, and clarity. The seriousness of peer review should not be watered down, inconsistencies should not be concealed, and the editor must be given a clear recommendation.

The process of peer review has a common structure: reading the abstract, reading the text of the article, final appraisal, and writing comments for authors and the editors.

Reading the abstract means checking the message of the article, recognition of the type of study, and formulation of broad questions.

In the abstract, authors disclose what they consider most important in their report. Therefore, the reading of the abstract can help the reviewer to look for the crucial elements of a case report, according to the CARE reporting guidelines. 

Writing a peer review. What we want to hear from you is about the quality and relevance of the manuscript, not your recommendations on whether to reject or accept it.  If the article presents an interesting idea, but is not sufficiently scientifically sound, the reviewer should suggest the authors how to improve it, and put forward the problem to the editor. Box 2 and Box 3 present common reasons for judging the manuscript as poor.

WRITING A PEER REVIEW REPORT

A peer review report consists of two main parts – one for the editor, and the other for the authors. Additionally, the reviewer is usually asked to write comments for the editor and, separately, for the authors.

Comments for the editor

The part intended for the editor is optional, if the reviewer has serious comments about an article, such as their doubt as to whether authors would be able to satisfactorily resolve the problems. This is also the place where the reviewer can express concerns about the integrity of the manuscript.

Comments for the authors

If the editor decides that the article should be revised before publishing (which is usually the case), he or she will send the reviews to the authors. Although the identity of the reviewer usually remains unknown to the authors, the review should be written as though it would be signed – politely, constructively, and collegially. STaR-Clinic leaves an option for the reviewer to sign his or her comments for the author.

The part intended for authors can be as long as 1,000 words or more, but length itself does not always guarantee quality. A few clear, well thought out, and focused questions can be more than enough to help authors to improve the article.

The reviewer should avoid any kind of censure, but also any kind of praise. In the first paragraph the authors might find it useful to see what the reviewer understood as the main message of their article.

If the reviewer could not evaluate certain aspects of the article, he or she should openly admit it.

The comments for authors should be divided and numbered so that the authors can clearly answer each one of them.

Major comments. The reviewer should first state the comments which were described to editor as the most important. Every comment or question should be well-explained and well-founded. Instead of general remarks like “sampling was bad,” it is necessary to clarify why certain aspects of the article are problematic. It is crucial to write precisely and to make clear if the comment is the result of personal reasoning or it is based on available scientific evidences.

Minor comments. The reviewer finally mentions minor faults like unnecessary repetitions, incorrect symbols, or abbreviations. They should be ordered in the same way they appear in the text, and identified by page, paragraph, and line.

A note for reviewers. It is important to complete the review in the time limit set by the editor. If for some reason the reviewer cannot do so, he or she should immediately inform the editor and agree whether the editor will wait longer or send the manuscript to someone else, in which case the reviewer can recommend some less busy colleagues.

It is also important to recognize possible conflicts of interest and, if necessary, decline reviewing the article, with an appropriate explanation to the editor.

Peer review should not be abused as an opportunity for revenge. Any kind of personal remarks are utterly inappropriate and editors usually do not convey them to the authors.

What follows is a brief guidance for authors on how to prepare the submission of a manuscript to STaR-Clinic. 

We remind the authors to pay special attention to the title and abstract, as they are the parts of the article that will be searchable in bibliographical databases and in online search engines such as Google.

We strongly encourage the authors to use the STaR-Clinic Manuscript Template to format their manuscript, in order to ensure that all required parts of the manuscripts are clearly presented.

The authors must follow the CARE reporting guidance and the CARE reporting checklist. We recommend the use of CARE tool to write the manuscript according to the reporting checklist. The CARE reporting checklist must be submitted with the manuscript.

The checklist is intended as an aid to authors to clearly, completely, and transparently let reviewers and readers know the details of the case report. A completed CARE checklist optimizes the quality of reporting and make the peer review process more efficient.

STRUCTURE OF THE MANUSCRIPT 

Title page 

The title page should present the topic of the case report, and should have “case report” in the title. 

List the full names and institutional addresses for all authors, including their ORCID numbers. ORCID numbers are mandatory.

Indicate the corresponding author.

Abstract

The Abstract should have up to 350 words. Please minimize the use of abbreviations and do not cite references in the abstract. The abstract must have the following separate sections:

Background: why the case should be reported and its novelty

Case presentation: a brief description of the patient’s clinical and demographic details, the diagnosis, any interventions and the outcomes

Conclusions: a brief summary of the clinical impact or potential implications of the case report

Keywords

List three to six words to describe the case report presented in the article. 

Background

The Background section should explain the background to the case report or study, its aims, a summary of the existing literature.

Case presentation

This section should include a description of the patient’s relevant demographic details, medical history, symptoms and signs, treatment or intervention, outcomes and any other significant details.

Discussion and Conclusions

These should be separate sections and should discuss the relevant existing literature and should state the main conclusions, including an explanation of their relevance or importance to the field.

Declarations

The following sections should be included in the Declarations section:

-      Ethics approval and consent to participate

Manuscripts reporting studies involving human participants, human data or human tissue must include a statement on ethics approval and consent (even where the need for approval was waived). This section should state the name of the ethics body that approved study and the official reference number(s) of the ethics opinion. 

-      Consent for publication

If your manuscript contains any individual person’s data in any form (including any individual details, images or videos), consent for publication must be obtained from that person, or in the case of children, their parent or legal guardian. All presentations of case reports must have consent for publication. You can use your institutional consent form or our consent form if you prefer. The form can be in the local language, to ensure that the patients can give fully informed consent. You should not send the form to us on submission, but we may request to see a copy at any stage (including after publication). An example of a publication consent is available here.

-      Availability of data and materials

All manuscripts must include an ‘Availability of data and materials’ statement. Data availability statements should include information on where data supporting the results reported in the article can be found including, where applicable, hyperlinks to publicly archived datasets analysed or generated during the study. By data we mean the minimal dataset that would be necessary to interpret, replicate and build upon the findings reported in the article. We recognise it is not always possible to share research data publicly, for instance when individual privacy could be compromised, and in such instances data availability should still be stated in the manuscript along with any conditions for access.

Data availability statements can take one of the following forms (or a combination of more than one if required for multiple datasets):

The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT WEB LINK TO DATASETS]

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].

The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due [REASON WHY DATA ARE NOT PUBLIC] but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

The data that support the findings of this study are available from [third party name] but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of [third party name].

Not applicable. If your manuscript does not contain any data, please state 'Not applicable' in this section.

-      Competing interests

STaR-Clinic subscribes to the ICMJE uniform disclosure form for reporting all financial and personal relationships that might bias the authors’ work. Authors must declare relevant competing interests related to the case presentation. They should fill in the competing interest form created by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). The ICMJE forms should be available from the corresponding author. STaR-Clinic also asks its reviewers to declare possible conflicts of interest related to the manuscripts under review.

-      Funding

Financial support, if applicable, should be stated in this section, including the full name of the funder and the number of the grant. If the funder has a specific role in the conceptualization, design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript, this should be declared.

-      Authors' contributions

The individual contributions of authors to the manuscript should be specified in this section. Use initials to refer to each author's contribution in this section, for example: "MM analysed and interpreted the patient data regarding the [disease] and the [procedure]. AA performed the pathological examination of the [organ], and was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript."

-      Acknowledgements

Authors should anyone who contributed towards the article who did not meet the criteria for authorship, including anyone who provided professional writing services or materials. Authors should obtain permission to acknowledge from all those mentioned in the Acknowledgements section.

TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

• All manuscripts can only be submitted electronically via OJS.
• Write in word processing programme, such as Word. Pages should be numbered.
• Use consistently either British English or American English.
• Clearly indicate corresponding author. Contact details must include the e-mail address and the complete postal address.
• Title and headings should be written in lowercase. Use a maximum of three level headings.
• Authors are invited to submit keywords associated with their paper (max. 6).
• Paragraphing should be indicated with indentions, not with extra space between paragraphs.
• Italics should be indicated with an italic typeface, not underlining. We discourage the use of italics for emphasis.
• Dates should be formatted as day month year (e.g., 1 January 2019). Dates in archival citations may follow the format used by the archive.
• Quotation marks should always be double, not single; single quotation marks should be used only to set off quotations within quotations.
• Punctuation with quotation marks: periods and commas at the ends of quotations should go inside the closing quotation mark. Other punctuation (colons, semicolons, question marks, exclamation points) should go outside unless part of the quotation.
• Block quotations in a separate paragraph should generally be restricted to quoted material of more than 100 words. Shorter quotations should usually be run into the text.

Length of the article 

STaR-Clinic does not impose any restrictions in the length of the article, but encourages the authors to present their research in a clear and concise way. Supplemental files are allowed and will be published online together with the paper, subject to peer review

Units of measurement 

Units of measurement should be expressed in SI and metric units.

Standard abbreviations and symbols 

Standard abbreviations and symbols should be used, and then defined in full in the first instance when they are mentioned unless they are standard units of measurement (such as length, mass, and temperature units). This applies independently to the abstract, text and each table or figure. 

Avoid the use of abbreviations in the title and abstract.

TABLES AND FIGURES 

Tables and figures must be self-explanatory – a reader should understand them without referring to the text of the article. 

Tables and figures show details of the data described in the text of the Results section of the article. The authors should avoid repeating data from a table/figure in the text; only key findings should be given in the text. 

Tables are suitable to present a large number of numerical data. 

Figures are suitable for comparisons of data and especially for showing temporal changes (changes in time), or to present primary research findings (like microphotographs).

Tables

• Tables should have a purpose; they should add information to the text of the manuscript, which tells the story of the research study, and be integrated with it. The purpose (“message”) of the table determines its form.
• Tables should be visually arranged to assist readers in finding, seeing, understanding, and remembering relevant information.
• Values to be compared should be placed side by side.
• Data presented in tables should not be duplicated elsewhere in the text.

Components of the tables:

1. Table number and title (above the table, with no period at the end).
2. Column headings.
3. Row headings.
4. Data.
5. Horizontal and vertical lines (simple only). (Do not use bold and shading.)
6. Expanded forms of abbreviations used in the table shown in the footnotes.
7. Footnotes referenced in the table, below the expanded abbreviations, with symbols usually used in the following order: *, †, ‡, §, ¶, ║, **, ††, and so on.

Figures

• Figures should have a purpose; they should contribute to and be integrated with the rest of the text.
• Figures should be designed to assist readers in finding, seeing, understanding, and remembering information.
• Figures should be clear and uncluttered.
• Figures should contain only those elements that are necessary to fulfil their purpose.
• The data should be emphasized over other elements in the figure.
• Data presented in figures should not be duplicated in the text.

Components of the figures:

1. Figure number.
2. Figure caption (legend). Figure legend has three parts: title, explanation of the symbols, key statistics. The legend is written continuously (no paragraphs), with a period at the end.
3. Data field.
4. Vertical scale.
5. Horizontal scale.
6. Labels for each scale.
7. Data.
8. Reference lines (e.g. zero line).
9. Keys and legends.

Do not make 3D figures unless you want to show three variables.

Supplemental material 

STaR-Clinic provides hosting additional materials online (e.g. datasets, podcasts, videos, images etc.) alongside the full-text of the article. 

POLICIES REGARDING THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (AI)

We developed these policies according to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) position statement and EASE recommendations on the use of AI and AI-assisted technology in manuscript preparation, which states that "authors are fully responsible for the content of their manuscript, even those parts produced by an AI tool, and are thus liable for any breach of publication ethics." They will be updated continually according to developments within the field. 

AI authorship

Generative AI (such as ChatGPT or Gemini) and AI-assisted technologies do not currently satisfy authorship criteria, as those models cannot be accountable for the all aspects of the work (e. g. research preparation, research conducting, data analysis, interpretation of results, writing a paper etc.). AI and AI-assisted technologies should not be listed as an author or co-author or be cited as an author. The authors are responsible and accountable for all parts of the work.

The use of AI (for example, to help develop the methodology, select statistical tests, generate content, write code, or process/interpret data) should be disclosed both in the cover letter to the editors and in the Methods or Acknowledgements section of manuscripts. 

Figures, images, or graphics created using such tools cannot be used in papers without explicit permission from the editors. Using AI tools for image generation will be approved on case-by-case basis to avoid legal copyright and research integrity issues. 

AI use by peer reviewers

Currently, we ask reviewers not to upload manuscripts to generative AI tools. Using AI tools in the peer review process may produce biased or false information, and data should not be shared outside the confidential peer review process. If any part of the evaluation was in any way supported by an AI tool, reviewers must declare the use of such tools in the peer review report, following the same rules that apply for the authors.

Declaration of the use of generative AI in scientific writing

If it is not appropriate to describe the use of AI and AI-assisted technologies in the Materials and Methods section accompanied with proper citation, then we require the authors to add this statement at the end of the manuscript, before the list of references: During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [NAME TOOL / SERVICE] to [REASON/ACTION]. After using the [NAME TOOL / SERVICE], the author(s) reviewed and edited the content and take(s) full responsibility for the content of the publication.

The tools for basic grammar and spelling checks or for managing references do not have to be included in the statement. In cases where the authors have nothing to disclose, this statement is not necessary.

STaR-Clinic uses the number-based citations to literature (so-called “Vancouver” style). However, you can submit your manuscript in any format, including references. If your manuscript is accepted for publication, we will work with you on adjusting it to the journal style. 

STaR-Clinic does not encourage the use of footnotes or endnote comments. All references should be mentioned in the text and listed at the end of the article. Comments should be a part of the manuscript text, in brackets if necessary. 

STaR-Clinic follows the Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals developed by International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Our reference style is based on ICMJE style. Examples of different types of references are available here. 

In the text, references should be numbered consecutively in the order in which they are first mentioned. References should be identified in text, tables, and legends by Arabic numerals in italics and in parentheses, e.g. (1), etc. 

References cited only in tables or figure legends should be numbered in accordance with the sequence established by the first identification in the text of the particular table or figure. The titles of journals should be abbreviated. 

References to accepted but yet unpublished articles should be designated as “forthcoming.” If you cite an article that has not been submitted yet, should be referenced to only in the text of the manuscript as “unpublished observation.” If the unpublished manuscript is from another researcher or research group, you have to submit written permission from the source. “Personal communications” should be avoided in general and especially in the list of references. Cite such sources in the parentheses in the text, including the name of the person and the date of the communication. For original research manuscript, you should obtain written permission and confirmation of accuracy from the source of such personal communication. 

If you are submitting a manuscript that has already been published as a preprint, inform us about this and provide a link to the preprint. It is helpful to state in the manuscript, best in the Introduction section, that the preprint article has been published, so that it is available to the reviewers. When you are citing a preprint in the reference list, the citation should clearly indicate that the reference is a preprint. When a preprint has been subsequently published in a journal you should cite the published article and not the preprint. Indicate that the reference is a preprint with a note [Preprint] after the title of the manuscript, as well as a link to the preprint. We advise against citing preprint that have not been published in a peer reviewed journal after a reasonable time.

STaR-Clinic REFERENCE STYLE

Article in a journal, standard journal article: 

Kim NE, Han SS, Yoo KH, Yun EK. The impact of user’s perceived ability on online health information acceptance. Telemed J E Health. 2012;18:703–8.

More than six authors 

Buljan I, Tokalić R, Roguljić M, Zakarija-Grković I, Vrdoljak D, Milić P, et al. Comparison of blogshots with plain language summaries of Cochrane systematic reviews: A qualitative study and randomized trial. Trials. 2020;21:426.

Organization as author 

Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Hypertension, insulin, and proinsulin in participants with impaired glucose tolerance. Hypertension. 2002;40:679–86.

Individual authors and a group author 

Vallancien G, Emberton M, Harving N, van Moorselaar RJ; Alf-One Study Group. Sexual dysfunction in 1,274 European men suffering from lower urinary tract symptoms. J Urol. 2003;169:2257–61.

No author given 

21st century heart solution may have a sting in the tail. BMJ. 2002;325:184.

Article not in English 

Ellingsen AE, Wilhelmsen I. Sykdomsangst blant medisin- og jusstudenter. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2002;122:785–7.

Volume with supplement 

Geraud G, Spierings EL, Keywood C. Tolerability and safety of frovatriptan with short- and long-term use for treatment of migraine and in comparison with sumatriptan. Headache. 2002;42 Suppl 2:S93–9.

Issue with supplement 

Glauser TA. Integrating clinical trial data into clinical practice. Neurology. 2002;58(12 Suppl 7):S6-12.

Article published electronically ahead of the print version: 

Yu WM, Hawley TS, Hawley RG, Qu CK. Immortalization of yolk sac-derived precursor cells. Blood. 2002 Nov 15;100(10):3828-31. Epub 2002 Jul 5.

Books and other monographs 

Personal author(s) 

Murray PR, Rosenthal KS, Kobayashi GS, Pfaller MA. Medical microbiology. 4th ed. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002.

Editor(s), compiler(s) as author 

Gilstrap LC 3rd, Cunningham FG, VanDorsten JP, editors. Operative obstetrics. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2002.

Author(s) and editor(s) 

Breedlove GK, Schorfheide AM. Adolescent pregnancy. 2nd ed. Wieczorek RR, editor. White Plains (NY): March of Dimes Education Services; 2001.

Organization(s) as author 

Royal Adelaide Hospital; University of Adelaide, Department of Clinical Nursing. Compendium of nursing research and practice development, 1999-2000. Adelaide (Australia): Adelaide University; 2001.

Chapter in a book 

Meltzer PS, Kallioniemi A, Trent JM. Chromosome alterations in human solid tumors. In: Vogelstein B, Kinzler KW, editors. The genetic basis of human cancer. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2002. p. 93–113.

Conference proceedings 

Harnden P, Joffe JK, Jones WG, editors. Germ cell tumours V. Proceedings of the 5th Germ Cell Tumour Conference; 2001 Sep 13-15; Leeds, UK. New York: Springer; 2002.

Conference paper 

Christensen S, Oppacher F. An analysis of Koza's computational effort statistic for genetic programming. In: Foster JA, Lutton E, Miller J, Ryan C, Tettamanzi AG, editors. Genetic programming. EuroGP 2002: Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Genetic Programming; 2002 Apr 3-5; Kinsdale, Ireland. Berlin: Springer; 2002. p. 182–91.

Dissertation 

Borkowski MM. Infant sleep and feeding: a telephone survey of Hispanic Americans [dissertation]. Mount Pleasant (MI): Central Michigan University; 2002.

Patent 

Pagedas AC, inventor; Ancel Surgical R&D Inc., assignee. Flexible endoscopic grasping and cutting device and positioning tool assembly. United States patent US 20020103498. 2002 Aug 1.

Newspaper article 

Tynan T. Medical improvements lower homicide rate: study sees drop in assault rate. The Washington Post. 2002 Aug 12;Sect. A:2 (col. 4).

Audiovisual material 

Chason KW, Sallustio S. Hospital preparedness for bioterrorism [videocassette]. Secaucus (NJ): Network for Continuing Medical Education; 2002.

Legal material 

Public law: 

Veterans Hearing Loss Compensation Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-9, 115 Stat. 11 (May 24, 2001).

Map 

Pratt B, Flick P, Vynne C, cartographers. Biodiversity hotspots [map]. Washington: Conservation International; 2000.

Dictionary and similar references 

Dorland's illustrated medical dictionary. 29th ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 2000. Filamin; p. 675.

Unpublished material 

In press/forthcoming: 

Tian D, Araki H, Stahl E, Bergelson J, Kreitman M. Signature of balancing selection in Arabidopsis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Forthcoming 2002.

Electronic material 

Homepage/Web site: 

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Preparing a Manuscript for Submission to a Medical Journal [cited 2022 Aug 8]. Available from: https://icmje.org/recommendations/browse/manuscript-preparation/preparing-for-submission.html

STaR-Clinic is a fully open access, peer-reviewed scientific journal committed to the free and universal dissemination of research. All articles published in the journal are freely available online immediately upon publication, without subscription or access fees.

We believe that open access to knowledge supports a more equitable global exchange of ideas, accelerates discovery, and enhances the visibility and impact of scientific research. Authors retain copyright of their work and articles are published under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

There are no paywalls, and all content is accessible to researchers, practitioners, educators, policymakers, and the general public worldwide. STaR-Clinic supports open science principles and encourages transparency, data sharing, and reproducibility.