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
Images in Medicine
Full Version
Massive Facial Plexiform Neurofibroma: An Unusual Presentation
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Jasleen Kaur,
Junior Resident, Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck, Datta Meghe Institute of Higher Education and Research, Wardha-442107, Maharashtra, India.
E-mail: jasleenkakkad@gmail.com
A 45-year-old male patient presented to the department with the chief complaint of overhanging folds of loose skin over the nose and left eye, and various round swellings on the face and throughout the body. The swelling had appeared 15-20 years ago and had gradually worsened over time. The patient reported suffering socially because of his condition. There was no relevant personal or family history, and he had no history of any co-morbidities. On examination, the swellings were of variable size, soft to firm, and non tender, located on the face and body. A colossal lesion originated from the left frontal region, with an overhanging skin mass concealing the left eye, nose, and maxillary area of his face, creating a disfiguring appearance (Table/Fig 1)a. However, upon elevation of the mass, the eye and nose were revealed to be perfectly normal, with unimpaired visual acuity, although the visual field was hampered (Table/Fig 1)b. A similar massive swelling was noted on the lateral aspect of the forehead (Table/Fig 1)c. The loose folds presented a staggering facial plexiform soft-tissue lesion, which is a hallmark of Neurofibromatosis Type 1 (NF1). Further examination unveiled the classic cutaneous manifestations of NF1, including café-au-lait macules, axillary freckling, and a multitude of cutaneous neurofibromas of varying sizes (Table/Fig 1)d, with the largest measuring an astonishing 3×3 cm.
The clinical diagnosis was Neurofibromatosis (NF) which was confirmed histopathologically. The patient was scheduled for excision, but they were not willing to undergo surgical intervention. The complications were explained to the patient and their relatives, but the patient refused the procedure.
Plexiform Neurofibromas (NF) are potentially devastating manifestations of Von Recklinghausen’s NF1. They are benign tumours that originate from nerve sheath cells or subcutaneous peripheral nerves and can involve multiple fascicles, occurring anywhere along the nerve, including the face, orbit, and globe. These tumours frequently involve the cranial and upper cervical nerves (1). Histologically, plexiform NF contain all elements of peripheral nerves and are characterised by an increase in the endoneural matrix, which leads to the separation of nerve fascicles and proliferation of Schwann cells (2),(3). Cutaneous manifestations of NF1 are among the imperative diagnostic criteria, along with café-au-lait spots, freckles, and neurofibromas (4).
Dogra BB and Rana KS presented two cases of facial NF treated at their hospital. The first patient, a female, had an overhanging mass of skin folds on the right side of her face, completely covering her right eye. The second patient, a young male, had a large, unsightly swelling on his right cheek that was pulling down his right eyelids and pinna. Both patients exhibited café-au-lait macules, axillary freckling, and multiple NF on their trunks. They underwent reconstructive surgery, which involved subtotal excision of the tumour mass and re-draping of the facial skin. Six months postsurgery, there was evidence of tumour regrowth in both cases (5).
Fadda MT et al., studied rare primary neurogenic tumours of the facial nerve, which are typically found intratemporally, with few cases involving the intracranial and intraparotid regions (6). They reported on a 10-year-old with NF1, who had a slowly growing cheek swelling diagnosed as a plexiform NF at age three. The patient had multiple nodular lesions without facial nerve impairment. A superficial parotidectomy was performed, preserving the facial nerve. Postoperatively, significant swelling was noted, and ultrasonography at three months showed recurrence. Plexiform NF, seen in up to 15% of NF1 patients, carry a risk of malignant transformation. Surgery is the only effective treatment, but it has a high recurrence rate due to the tumours’ infiltrative nature. Recurrence rates are higher in patients operated on before age 10; therefore, it is advisable to delay surgery for asymptomatic paediatric patients to minimise physical and psychological impact (7).
The differential diagnosis considered included schwannoma, lipoma, haemangioma, Proteus Syndrome (PS), and Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome. Schwannoma was ruled out based on the appearance of the lesions, as in schwannomas, the Schwann cells grow as a mass that pushes the nerve aside and may compress it. NF, on the other hand, often comprise a heterogeneous collection of blood cells, connective tissue cells, and other cell types from the nerve sheath that surrounds the nerve without displacing it. Lipomas appear as lumps, while haemangiomas are usually located in the skin and subcutaneous tissues. Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome was ruled out due to the absence of macrocephaly (large head size). PS was excluded as a diagnosis because there were no malignancies or pulmonary conditions present, which are generally associated with this condition (8).
The patient presented here exhibits a highly characteristic example of NF1, which is of significant interest due to the pronounced distortion of their facial features. In such cases, a thorough examination of the patient is necessary because of the potential for widespread involvement of underlying anatomical areas.
Axillary freckles, Café-au-lait macules, Facial disfigurement
DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2024/73533.19774
Date of Submission: Jun 13, 2024
Date of Peer Review: Jul 01, 2024
Date of Acceptance: Jul 18, 2024
Date of Publishing: Aug 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 14, 2024
• Manual Googling: Jul 11, 2024
• iThenticate Software: Jul 17, 2024 (8%)
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