Clinical Case Reports
🧾 Journal Overview
- Publisher: Wiley
- ISSN: 2050-0904 (Online)
- Scope: Broad-spectrum open-access journal focused on the publication of clinical case reports across all areas of medicine.
- Impact Factor: Not indexed in Journal Citation Reports (JCR); relies on alternative metrics such as CiteScore (Scopus: ~0.8 as of 2024).
🧠 Strengths
- Wide Accessibility:
- Open access model facilitates global dissemination.
- Useful for clinicians in low-resource settings.
- Inclusive Scope:
- Accepts submissions from all specialties.
- Encourages interdisciplinary and early-career submissions.
- Rapid Publication:
- Turnaround time ~4–6 weeks.
- Emphasis on dissemination over prestige.
- Educational Utility:
- Real-world cases useful for clinical training and teaching.
⚠️ Limitations and Criticisms
- Low Scientific Rigor:
- Mostly anecdotal reports with limited generalizability.
- Sparse discussion of differential diagnoses or mechanisms.
- Editorial Selectivity:
- Low threshold for acceptance.
- Potential for case inflation and publication volume over quality.
- APC ($1,800 USD) may bias acceptance policy.
- Not Indexed in Major Rankings:
- Not listed in Web of Science (SCIE).
- Limited value for academic CVs or research grants.
- Reproducibility and Ethical Oversight:
- Often lacks imaging, diagnostic work-up, or explicit consent.
- Ethical review rarely mentioned.
🧩 Comparison with Peer Journals
| Journal | Strength | Weakness |
|---|---|---|
BMJ Case Reports | Strong editorial guidance, peer-review | Subscription-based, limited access |
Clinical Case Reports | Open access, rapid publishing | Low academic impact, weak filtering |
Cureus | Fast, PubMed-indexed | Perceived low editorial standards |
Case Reports in Neurology | Specialty focus, PubMed-indexed | Narrower audience |
🧭 Final Verdict
Clinical Case Reports serves a niche role in:
- Showcasing rare or illustrative clinical cases
- Offering publication opportunity for early-career authors
- Providing educational material for teaching rounds
However, its:
- Low impact
- Lack of indexing
- Minimal critical review
…limit its use in high-level evidence synthesis or academic advancement.
Recommendation:
- ✅ Suitable for:
- Unique or instructive cases
- Didactic sharing within departments
- First-time clinical authors
- ❌ Not suitable for:
- Impactful academic CV building
- Meta-analyses or guideline citation
- Competitive research funding portfolios