Article in PDF
How to Cite
Citation Manager
Readers' Comments (0)
Audio Visual Article Statistics
Link
to PUBMED
Print this Article
Send to a Friend
Advertisers
Access Statistics Resources
Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."
Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011
Dr. Shankar P.R.
"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."
Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011 Anuradha
Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.
Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020
Case report
Full Version
Lichen Scrofulosorum: A Case Report
Correspondence Address :
G Sukanya,
7, CLC Works Road, Chromepet, Chennai-600044, Tamil Nadu, India.
E-mail: drsukanyamathupal@gmail.com
Lichen Scrofulosorum (LS) is an uncommon tuberculid that was initially described by Hebra in 1868 and typically affects children and young adults. Tuberculids are hypersensitivity reactions in the skin caused by internal Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. These eruptive lesions result from bacilli spreading through the bloodstream in a host with high resistance to Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Although uncommon, this condition can be a valuable indicator of tuberculosis. Patients with LS typically exhibit a strong tuberculin reaction, concomitant tuberculous involvement of lymph nodes, bone, or other organs, and they show a good response to Antitubercular Therapy (ATT). Hereby, the authors present a case report of a 35-year-old female who presented with multiple papules on her face for five years. A detailed examination revealed no tuberculin reaction, no lymph node involvement, and a good response to ATT. Therefore, LS is a tuberculid that may resemble several other dermatological disorders, necessitating a thorough effort to verify the diagnosis.
Antitubercular therapy, Cutaneous tuberculosis, Langhans giant cells, Mantoux test, Tuberculids
A 35-year-old female presented to the Dermatology Outpatient Department (OPD) with complaints of skin-coloured papules on her face for the past five years. These lesions progressively increased in size over the last six months. There was no history of itching, pain, upper respiratory tract infections, trauma, evening rise in temperature, weight loss, loss of appetite, or any drug intake prior to the onset of the lesions. There was no similar family history reported. She was initially diagnosed with sarcoidosis five years ago after a skin biopsy, for which she was given hydroxychloroquine for six months with partial response, after which she discontinued treatment on her own.
The patient revisited the Outpatient Department with a history of aggravation in the number and size of the lesions over the last six months and was re-evaluated. Cardiovascular, respiratory, abdominal, and central nervous system examinations were normal. Upon general examination, there were no signs of pallor, icterus, cyanosis, clubbing, lymphadenopathy, or pedal oedema. Cutaneous examination revealed multiple closely grouped, smooth, soft to firm skin-coloured, non tender papules measuring 1 mm to 3 mm over the forehead (Table/Fig 1)a and bilateral malar region, with no evidence of any discharge. No lymphadenopathy was noted (Table/Fig 1)b. Examination of the scalp, nails, oral cavity, palms, soles, and genitalia showed no abnormalities.
Based on the history and clinical findings, differential diagnoses of papular sarcoid, lupus miliaris disseminatus faciei, and leprosy were considered. A 4 mm punch biopsy from the forehead lesions was taken, which microscopically showed dense dermal inflammatory infiltrate in the upper dermis, with adnexal structures extending to the subcutis. There was evidence of occasional giant cells (Table/Fig 2)a. On high-power view, there were multiple epithelioid granulomas with Langhans-type giant cells and no evidence of necrosis. Histopathology {Haematoxylin and Eosin (H&E)} did not reveal any nerves or perineural infiltrate (Table/Fig 2)b. Acid-fast staining, Mantoux test, and radiological examination of the chest were normal. Haematological findings were within normal limits. The human immunodeficiency virus test, venereal disease research laboratory test, and hepatitis B surface antigen test were negative.
Based on the clinical, laboratory, and histopathological findings, a diagnosis of leprosy was confirmed, and the patient was started on ATT along with a short course of low-dose methylprednisolone (4 mg once a day) for two months. A response to treatment was noted within two weeks of starting the therapy. The patient completed six months of ATT with complete resolution of the lesions (Table/Fig 3).
The LS (Lichen Simplex) commonly affects children and adolescents with active tuberculosis and manifests as a lichenoid eruption of minute papules, primarily observed in the Indian subcontinent and Sub-Saharan Africa (1). Globally, tuberculosis is a leading cause of illness and death, with an estimated 1.3 million cases and 450,000 associated deaths among children each year (2). The current tuberculosis outbreak is attributed to several factors, including Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS), the emergence of drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis strains, poverty, immigration, and insufficient tuberculosis control measures (3). The overall incidence of cutaneous tuberculosis was estimated to be 0.7% (131 of 18,720 outpatients), and LS was the fourth most common variant, with an 11.2% prevalence, after scrofuloderma (36.5%), lupus vulgaris (31%) and tuberculosis verruca cutis (12.9%). A large study in Hong Kong found that the incidence of LS was the lowest among the three tuberculids at 2%, highlighting the significance of this important marker for possibly undetected cases of tuberculosis (4).
A tuberculid is a cutaneous immune response to the bacterium Mycobacterium tuberculosis, which is frequently latent in other parts of the body. Historically, many different skin manifestations have been diagnosed as tuberculids, but papulonecrotic tuberculid, LS, and erythema induratum of Bazin are the only three entities currently recognised as authentic tuberculids (4),(5). LS is a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction. The diagnostic criteria for LS include the identification of tuberculoid granuloma on histopathology, indications of concurrent or prior tuberculous foci elsewhere, a strongly positive Mantoux test result, the absence of Mycobacterium tuberculosis in smear and culture, and the resolution of the cutaneous lesion with ATT (6).
The clinical manifestation consists of small, skin-coloured, perifollicular grouped papules, as seen in the current case. The abdomen, trunk, back, proximal limbs, face, vulva, palms, and soles are the primary sites where they typically appear. Their smooth surfaces are covered with tiny scales; however, in this scenario, the patient had lesions only on the face (6),(7). In the current case, there was only a skin-coloured papule on the face, which progressively increased in size, with no lesions elsewhere. Risk factors include overcrowding, direct contact with M. tuberculosis-infected individuals, and low socioeconomic status. The likely factors determining the age distribution of this condition include a greater prevalence of extrapulmonary TB in children and a steady decline in delayed hypersensitivity with age (7),(8). Histopathology shows non caseating epithelioid cell granuloma in the papillary dermis, usually encircling the appendages, with no evidence of necrosis, as observed in the current case.
The granuloma is made up of lymphocytes and epithelioid cells, with a few Langhans giant cells. It is difficult to cultivate tubercle bacilli from skin biopsy material, and they are not visible in the pathological sections. The Mantoux test is positive in LS; however, in present case, it was negative, yet the clinical and histopathological features were suggestive of LS. The diagnosis was confirmed retrospectively due to the response to ATT (9).
The LS is frequently overlooked or misdiagnosed as other follicular disorders, such as keratosis pilaris, pityriasis rubra pilaris, lichen spinulosus, lichen nitidus, and lichenoid sarcoidosis, due to its hidden and asymptomatic presentation (10). LS shows a marked response to the ATT regimen, with lesions resolving completely without pigmentation or scarring within 12 weeks (11),(12), on average, between three to eight weeks.
The LS is a tuberculid that can mimic a number of other dermatological conditions, and meticulous work is required to confirm the diagnosis.
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2024/73137.20331
Date of Submission: May 28, 2024
Date of Peer Review: Jul 18, 2024
Date of Acceptance: Oct 22, 2024
Date of Publishing: Nov 01, 2024
AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. Yes
PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jun 03, 2024
• Manual Googling: Jul 22, 2024
• iThenticate Software: Oct 21, 2024 (16%)
ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin
EMENDATIONS: 6
- Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
- Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
- Academic Search Complete Database
- Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
- Embase
- EBSCOhost
- Google Scholar
- HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
- Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
- Journal seek Database
- Popline (reproductive health literature)
- www.omnimedicalsearch.com