Tackling the case report

Abstract

Objective: Resuscitative measures are required to ensure the survival of the case report in medical writing. The aim of this study was to assess a series of case reports for quality improvement.

Methods: All articles pertaining to a single patient published in Auris Nasus Larynx and The Journal of Laryngology and Otology from January to December 2000 inclusive were examined. Data recorded included authorship numbers and origin of the report, pertinence of the accompanying abstract, length of the article, claims of a first and the number of references included in the bibliography.

Results: Twelve different countries produced 129 papers in the two journals. Author numbers ranged from 2 to 7 (mean 4.56) in Auris Nasus Larynx, and were 1 to 11 (mean 2.63) in The Journal of Laryngology and Otology. Overall, there were 45 articles of two pages or less. An appropriate summary existed in 79.6% of articles published in Auris Nasus Larynx and in 33.9% of abstracts located in The Journal of Laryngology and Otology. A unique occurrence was reported in 14 and 27.82%, respectively. The number of citations ranged from 3 to 28 (mean 12.4) in Auris Nasus Larynx and 2 to 28 (mean 10.2) in The Journal of Laryngology and Otology.

Conclusion: Case reports require a more applicable summary with a limit on authors, pages and references.