AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-1919/185
Damietta Health Affairs, Egyptian Ministry of Health (MOH), Damietta, Egypt.
*Corresponding Author: Yasser Mohammed Hassanain Elsayed, Damietta Health Affairs, Egyptian Ministry of Health (MOH), Damietta, Egypt.
Citation: Elsayed Y M H, (2021). Yasser's COVID-19 Discrepancy Phenomenon; A Novel Phenomenon And Effective Regimen; Retrospective-Observational Study. J Clinical Research and Reports, 8(4); DOI:10.31579/2690-1919/185
Copyright: © 2021, Elsayed Y M H. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 15 June 2021 | Accepted: 30 June 2021 | Published: 12 July 2021
Keywords: Covid-19; discrepancy phenomenon; effective regimen; leukocytosis; electrocardiographic; PHEIC; computerized tomography; CRP
Aim of the study: Clarification for the time of the clinical improvement after management COVID-19 pneumonia versus normal gradation of common workup is the target for the current study.
Background: COVID-19 pneumonia is a current serious international pandemic infection. Generally, in medical diseases, the clinical response is commonly parallel to laboratory and radiological improvement. This rule may be different in COVID-19 pneumonia.
Method of study and patients: The author reported retrospective-observational 47-case report series. The study was conducted in a physician outpatient clinic thorough nearly 12-months, starting from Jun 9, 2020, and, ended on May 8, 2021. All included cases were COVID-19 pneumonia and treated with conventional antibiotics, anticoagulants, and steroids.
Results: The mean ±SD age was: 50.08 (14.9) years, with male sex predominance (55.32%). The mean days of clinical versus leukocytosis, neutrophilia, and lymphopenia improvement (0.84 ±0.49, 13.05 ±6.44, 13.05 ±7.01, 13.05 ±7.01).The mean ±SD days of clinical versus CRP, D-dimer, s. ferritin, and LDH improvement (0.84 ±0.49, 12.2 ±3.25, 12.2 ±6.21, 12.3 ±5.46, 20.92± 9.48). The mean days of clinical versus radiological and electrocardiographic improvement (0.84 ±0.49, 15.74 ±5.25, 11.45 ±5.45). The test was statistically significant in all the above tests (p-value is < .00001)
Conclusions: Yasser’s COVID-19 Discrepancy phenomenon is a novel descriptive phenomenon that is always seen in all COVID-19 pneumonia. Initial dramatic improvement of the clinical status of COVID-19 pneumonic patient, not a simultaneously after the management, not a coincide with laboratory, radiological, and electrocardiographic workup. Further larger studies for the study medical regimen with considering of “Yasser’s COVID-19 Discrepancy phenomenon” is recommended.
1. COVID-19 patients and investigations; general and significant view
A pandemic of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) had emerged in December 2019 in China causing a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) [1]. Clinical information, laboratory data, and computerized tomography (CT) scans have been used in the setting of COVID-19 pandemic, peripherally as part of the diagnostic work-up, but mostly to help define patient prognosis and to guide clinical management [1]. Clinical, laboratory, and imaging features have been partially characterized in some observational studies [1]. The recognition and differentiation between the more severe COVID-19 versus non-severe patients using the general laboratory tests will be entirely valuable for clinicians in predicting the disease progression [2]. There is a strong need for recognizing the mortality predictors that permit clinicians to rapidly triage severe COVID-19 patients into Intensive care units (ICUs) at hospitalization [3]. Laboratory data and chest CT have been used during the COVID-19 pandemic, mainly to determine patient prognosis and guide clinical management [4].
2. Blood elements and inflammatory markers
Total leukocytes, neutrophils, C-reactive protein (CRP), creatinine, serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase (SGPT), serum glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase (SGOT), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) increase with worsening parenchymal involvement [1]. Meta-analyses revealed a significant fall in lymphocyte, monocyte, and eosinophil, hemoglobin (HB), platelet, albumin, serum sodium (Na+), lymphocyte to CRP % (LCR), leukocyte to C-reactive protein % (LeCR), leukocyte to IL-6 % (LeIR), and an increase in the neutrophil, SGPT, SGOT, total bilirubin, blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), Procalcitonin (PCT), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), fibrinogen, prothrombin time (PT), d-dimer, glucose level, and neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in the severe group compared with the non-severe group [2]. No significant changes in white blood cells (WBC), creatine kinase (CK), troponin I, myoglobin, Interleukin 6 (IL-6), and K between the two groups were noted. This meta-analysis gives evidence for the triage of severe cases of COVID-19 relied on laboratory test results at the decision of critical care admission [2]. Interestingly, all COVID-19 patients showed remarkable numeric and morphologic white blood cell (WBC) abnormalities, which can differentiate the mild from severe disease infection [5]. So, hospitalized COVID-19 patients must subject to a daily complete blood count (CBC) and manual WBC differential for observing numerical and morphologic abnormalities. These changes are predictive of poor outcomes and signs of disease progression [5].
3. Leukocytic count with its differentiation
Current reports had revealed that the presence of leukocytosis in a proportion of COVID-19 patients presentation. Unfortunately, clinical data regards these patients are rare. An elder COVID-19 patient presented with underlying chronic disorders is more liable to have leukocytosis. These patients are more at risk to develop severe illness, higher need for ICU admission, and raised mortality rate [6].
Abnormal WBC morphologyis most vigorous in monocytes and lymphocytes with more mild COVID-19 disease but these abnormalities were missing with COVID-19 disease progression [5]. There were significant differences in morphology-associated the two viruses, including elevated RNA material in monocytes, decreased RNA material in lymphocytes, and minimal hypogranular neutrophils [5]. In severe COVID-19 disease, there were remarkable neutrophilia and lymphopenia, especially, in ICU patients [5]. So, severe disease is usually accompanied by lymphopenia and leukocytosis [7]. Both abnormal cellular and humoral immunity were essential findings of non-survivors with COVID-19 patients [8]. Thus, neutrophilia and lymphocytopenia were immunity-linked risk factors guide for mortality in COVID-19 patients [8]. COVID-19 patients with lymphopenia must be assessed for suitable management and ICU admission [9]. A decrease in lymphocyte counts paralleled worsening parenchymal extension, along with reduced arterial oxygen partial pressure and saturation [4]. Lymphopenia and a raised neutrophil/lymphocyte % are the most harmonious abnormal hemocytometric changes and modifications that may deteriorate in the severity of COVID-19 disease [10]. Also, lymphopenia is consistently present in more than 40% of the patients across eight studies with more than 500 patients. Data from the 2002–2003 outbreak indicate that SARS may be associated with lymphopenia, leukopenia, and thrombocytopenia, elevated levels of LDH, SGOT SGPT, and creatine kinase [4, 11].
Indeed, the lymphocyte-to-neutrophil ratio (LNR) and neutrophil-to-monocyte ratio (NMR) are good predictors for hospitalization in severe COVID-19 infection [3].
A fourfold increase of D-dimer at hospitalization greater than 2.0 µg/mL is an effective predictor for in-hospital mortality in patients with COVID-19. It is helpful as an early biomarker that is indicated to improve the management of COVID-19 patients [12].
4. Inflammatory and biological markers
Autopsies reported increasing in CRP levels in patients who died of COVID-19 infection. So, it is a good biomarker for assessing disease lethality [13]. COVID-19 patients with elevated CRP levels and elevated LDH should be assessed for suitable management and ICU admission [9].
The most frequent and consistent changes previously reported in association with worsening lung involvement, concerning increased CRP and LDH concentrations and reduced lymphocyte counts and oxygen level [14]. There is a profuse cytokine releasing with hyperferritinemia which suggests that a COVID-19 infection is part of the hyperferritinemic syndrome series [15]. Indeed, marked elevated ferritin levels can present in other non- COVID-19 diseases such as hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, macrophage activation syndrome, adult-onset Still's disease, catastrophic antiphospholipid syndrome, and septic shock [15]. Several studies have shown the immunomodulatory results of ferritin and its relation to mortality and continued inflammatory effects [3]. The raised concentration of free iron is tissue hazardous which is associated with redox damage and ending with fibrosis. Iron chelation is essentially considered in the management of iron overload. Iron chelation also possesses an anti-viral and anti-fibrotic activity [15]. All four types gathered under the term "hyperferritinemic syndromes" is sharing the clinical and laboratory data with the severe form of COVID-19 several features. This similar sharing between COVID-19 and "hyperferritinemic syndromes" is meaning that the severe COVID-19 is the fifth one of hyperferritinemic syndromes [16].
5. Chest CT in COVID-19 pneumonia
Chest CT scan provides information on both type and degree of parenchymal involvement, the first including mostly ground-glass opacities (GGO) and consolidation, and the latter through estimating, visually or automatically, the percentage of involved lung parenchyma. A potential prognostic role of chest CT signs, especially the extent of parenchymal involvement, has been proposed [17-20]. Few studies have also combined clinical, laboratory, and chest CT signs [21, 22]. Some of these suggest that the performance of the prognostic model is better when adding CT features, while the others show that chest CT findings had insufficient prognostic power to be used in combination models [4].
The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), formerly known as the 2019 novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV), is a newly emerging zoonotic agent that appeared in December 2019 and causes the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) [23]. After correcting for parenchymal extension, ground-glass opacities were associated with reduced platelets and increased procalcitonin, consolidation with increased CRP, and reduced O2 saturation [4]. Pulmonary lesions induced by SARS-CoV-2 infection were associated with raised inflammatory response, impaired gas exchange, and end-organ damage. Lung lesions probably exert a central role in COVID-19 pathogenesis and clinical presentation [4].
Method of study and patients
My case study was a retrospective-observational 47-case report series. The study was conducted in a
physician outpatient clinic.
The author reported the 47-cases through nearly
12-months starting from Jun 9, 2020 and ended on May 8, 2021. (Table 1).
The cases were generally investigated COVID-19 that was undergoing initial ECG, chest CT, CBC, d-dimer, s. ferritin, LDH. SGPT, SGOT, s. creatinine, blood urea, and random blood sugar, and ionized calcium. Other electrolytes, arterial blood gases (ABG), troponin test, serum albumin, and echocardiography were done in selected cases. The study considers initial and post-recovery investigation for ECG, chest CT, leukocytic count, lymphocytic count, neutrophilic count, d-dimer level, s. ferritin, and LDH. (Figure 1).
All cases were treated at home with cefotaxime; (1000 mg IV every 8hours), azithromycin (500 mg PO single daily dose), oseltamivir (75 mg PO twice daily only for 5 days), paracetamol (500 mg IV every 8 hours as needed), SC enoxaparin 80 mg twice daily), aspirin tablet (75 mg, once daily), clopidogrel tablet (75 mg, once daily), and hydrocortisone sodium succinate (100 mg IV every 12 hours; was tapered with time) were added. O2 inhalation by O2 cylinder (100%, by nasal cannula, 5L/min) was added on need. IVI fluids were sometimes given according to the clinical indications. Dose adjustment for some of the above drugs in hepatic impairment, renal impairment, cardiac, hypertensive, and diabetic patients were applied. The patient was daily monitored for temperature, pulse, blood pressure, and O2 saturation. For more details on general, clinical, and laboratory data for the cases see (Table 2 and 3).
Suggesting hypothesis and research objectives
• Suggesting hypothesis: COVID-19 pneumonia can be improved clinically in discrepancy or parallel to the laboratory, radiological and electrocardiographic workup after the management.
• The research objectives to evaluate this hypothesis might include: What is Yasser’s COVID-19 Discrepancy phenomenon? Is there a paradoxical discrepancy relationship between clinical status and COVID-19 post-management? Is the study supported by past publicized literature studies? What is the magnitude of Yasser’s COVID-19 Discrepancy phenomenon in the study?
• Response after recorded calculated days was reported post-the recovery of COVID-19 pneumonia. For more details see the summary of the study data (Table 3).
• All the above criteria were assessed in parallel to the clinical status vs. laboratory, radiological, and electrocardiographic workup.
• Simple selection was used in the assignment of patients for COVID-19 pneumonia.
• The treatment was administered according to international guidelines of COVID-19 pneumonia management [24-26].
• According to the response of COVID-19 pneumonia to treatment and according to “author opinion”; there are two types of response in the study;
• The “Clinical response”; It is meaning that the presence of entirely and acutely reliving general symptoms of COVID-19 pneumonia after treatment.
• The “Delayed workup response”; it is meaning that is still the presence of abnormal laboratory, radiological, and electrocardiographic workup despite there is a dramatic clinical response.
• Eligibility criteria:
• Inclusion criteria: All cases with COVID-19 pneumonia. Patients' ages started from 18 and up to 75 years old.
• Exclusion criteria:
1. Non-COVID-19 pneumonia.
2. Non-COVID-19 infection.
• Study limitations: The only study limitations for the current study was absence of the confirmatory tests for COVID-19 infections.
• The patient's informed consent was taken. Ethical issues were considered.
3. Results and findings
The result is significant at p < 0>
• One-Way Repeated Measures ANOVA test was used in statistical analysis using mean with standard deviation.
• Age averages in the study; Mean: 50.08, Mode: 44, Median: 48. The mean ±SD age was: 50.08 (14.9) years, with male sex predominance (55.32%).
• Sex in the study: Male (M) 55.32% (26 cases) vs. Female (F) 44.68% (21 cases). (Figure 2).
• The mean days of improvement
1. The mean days of clinical versus leukocytosis, neutrophilia, and lymphopenia improvement in the study showed statistical significance (p-value is < 0>
2. The day of clinical versus CRP, D-dimer, s. ferritin, and LDH improvement in the study showed statistical significance (p-value is < 0>
3. The mean days of clinical versus radiological and electrocardiographic improvement in the study showed statistical significance (p-value is < 0>
• Generally, in medical diseases, the clinical response is commonly parallel to laboratory and radiological improvement.
• So, there is a direct relationship between clinical status and laboratory workup.
• But, the author revealed that there are deviations between the clinical response or improvement and the improvement in both laboratory, radiological, and electrocardiographic workup.
• Initial dramatic improvement of the clinical status of COVID-19 pneumonic patient, not a simultaneously after the management, not a coincide with laboratory, radiological, and electrocardiographic workup.
• Unfortunately, no relevant studies are taking into consideration the time for identifying the relationship of the improvement in clinical versus and workup.
• These studies mostly signifying and mention for both used drugs and needed laboratory, radiological, and work up with no focusing on the above relationship between clinical status and laboratory workup.
• Yasser’s COVID-19 Discrepancy phenomenon is an explaining phenomenon for the above relationship in COVID-19 pneumonia.
• Yasser’s COVID-19 Discrepancy phenomenon is a novel descriptive phenomenon that is always seen in all COVID-19 pneumonia.
• Yasser’s COVID-19 Discrepancy phenomenon is happening after giving the following medical regimen; cefotaxime; (1000 mg IV every 8hours), azithromycin (500 mg PO single daily dose), oseltamivir (75 mg PO twice daily only for 5 days), paracetamol (500 mg IV every 8 hours as needed), SC enoxaparin 80 mg twice daily), aspirin tablet (75 mg, once daily), clopidogrel tablet (75 mg, once daily), and hydrocortisone sodium succinate (100 mg IV every 12 hours; was tapered with time) were added. O2 inhalation by O2 cylinder (100%, by nasal cannula, 5L/min) was added on need. IVI fluids were sometimes given according to the clinical indications. Dose adjustment for some of the above drugs in hepatic impairment, renal impairment, cardiac, hypertensive, and diabetic patients were applied. The patient was daily monitored for temperature, pulse, blood pressure, and O2 saturation. The duration of this regimen is variable according to the improvement in the laboratory, radiological, and electrocardiographic workup but not the clinical status.
• In this phenomenon, there dramatic acute clinical improvement after management with the above regimen but there are delays in improvement with the time variation for the laboratory, radiological, and electrocardiographic workup (Figure 1).
• This regimen was given according to the international guidelines for COVID-19 pneumonia [24-26] but with some variations in the duration of management, type, and the number of used medications. Vitamin C and Zinc preparations were quietly excluded in this study.
• “Yasser’s COVID-19 Discrepancy phenomenon” is a novel descriptive phenomenon that is always seen in all COVID-19 pneumonia.
• Initial dramatic improvement of the clinical status of COVID-19 pneumonic patient, not a simultaneously after the management, not a coincide with laboratory, radiological, and electrocardiographic workup.
• Further larger studies for the study medical regimen with considering of “Yasser’s COVID-19 Discrepancy phenomenon” is recommended.
There are no conflicts of interest.
I wish to thank Dr. Ameer Mekkawy M.sc. for technical support and my wife to save time and improving the conditions for helping me.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
