AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2768-0487/163
1Assistant Professor, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
2Assistant Professor, Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
3Chief Medical Technologist, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
*Corresponding Author: Saiful Islam., Assistant Professor, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Citation: Saiful Islam, Rubaiyat-E-Mortaz, Nasrin Jahan, Sabrina Shafiq, Khan Shahariar Zaman, et.al., (2025), Role of Neutrophil Cd64 in Identification of Neonatal Sepsis, Journal of Clinical and Laboratory Research, 8(1); DOI:10.31579/2768-0487/163
Copyright: © 2025, Saiful Islam. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Received: 25 November 2024 | Accepted: 26 December 2024 | Published: 14 January 2025
Keywords: neutrophil cd64; identification; neonatal sepsis
Detection of neutrophil CD64 may help in the early diagnosis of neonatal sepsis and may prevent unnecessary delay in diagnosis, enable prompt start of treatment and will help in reducing mortality and sepsis related complication. Another advantage is that neutrophil CD64 expression is not influenced by antibiotic therapy. Absence of any research in this field in our country has tempted me to undertook this study. This cross-sectional study was carried out in the Department of Clinical Pathology, Neonatology and Microbiology & Immunology, BSMMU, Dhaka. Total 60 neonates who fulfilled inclusion criteria were included in the study. After taking inform written consent from patient’s attendant, blood sample were obtained from peripheral venipuncture in all neonates within 24 hours of admission with all aseptic precaution. A total 3.5 ml venous blood was taken of which 1.5 ml was collected in EDTA tube for complete blood count, PBF and for neutrophil CD64 estimation and another 2.0 ml for blood culture. Neutrophil CD64 expression were measured by Flow cytometry. In all observation, early onset of sepsis was observed more (62.5%) than that of late onset of sepsis. Among the infected newborns, male was predominant (57.5%). Preterm (82.5%) and low birth weight babies (77.5%) are more susceptible to infection. Premature rupture of membrane (PROM) >24 hours was found to be an important risk factor in neonatal septicemia. Blood culture was found positive only in 9 (22.5%) cases. Platelet count and IT ratio were found significantly associated with sepsis (p<0.05). In the present work neutrophil CD64 showed high sensitivity, specificity, PPV and high NPV (100%, 54.9%, 28.13% and 100% respectively). The results of our study also showed significantly elevated levels of CD64 in septic neonates (36.03±25.70) when compared with controls (4.85±2.95) and also their percentage of expression was higher in culture positive sepsis (77.07±15.07%) than culture negative sepsis (26.56±13.46). Combination of the studied markers such as neutrophil CD64 + IT ratio was associated with higher sensitivity (100%), specificity (62.5%), positive predictive values (32.14%), and high negative predictive value (100%). So neutrophil CD64 is more reliable marker for early diagnosis of neonatal sepsis. It is better than other established marker of neonatal sepsis. It prevents unnecessary delay of treatment and shortened the hospital stay, thereby reduce mortality and sepsis related complications
Diagnosis of neonatal sepsis is one of the most difficult tasks in clinical practice. As the disease progress more rapidly than adult and the mortality rate is higher in neonates, timely diagnosis of neonatal sepsis is essential (Zaki and Sayed, 2009). Several different laboratory determinations are helpful in diagnosis of neonatal sepsis. Among them blood cultures are used as the gold standard for diagnosis of sepsis. It helps to make therapeutic decision, especially in choosing the appropriate antibiotics (Layseca, 2002).
The blood cultures have some difficulties. Culture results may be delayed for 24 hours (preliminary report) to 7 days (final report) after collection. Positive cultures ranged from 8% to 73% in the diagnosis of neonatal sepsis (Chiesa et al., 2004). The possibility of sepsis in the presence of negative blood culture is noted in neonates who are exposed to antibiotics in utero (Bhandari et al., 2008). As a results of unnecessary exposure to antibiotics in neonates with clinical suspicion of sepsis, creates an environment for emergence of bacterial resistance (Magudumana et al., 2000). The negative microbiological cultures do not always exclude the presence of bacterial sepsis (Ng PC et al., 2004). Blood cultures are often negative in some cases of pneumonia and meningitis (Layseca., 2002). As the sensitivity of blood culture is low and longer time required and false negative result may be found, so the other tests in diagnosis of neonatal sepsis are warranted. So early diagnosis of neonatal sepsis is still a great challenge for both the developed and developing countries. Recently numerous cell surface antigens have been studied as promising biomarkers of infection, including CD11b, CD69 and CD64 (Ng PC et al., 2006). In flow cytometric technology neutrophil CD64 is found to be a promising marker for diagnosis of early and late infections in newborns.
Study design: Cross sectional
Place of study: This study was conducted in the Department of Clinical Pathology, Department of Neonatology and in the Department of Microbiology and Immunology, BSMMU, Dhaka.
Study population:
Inclusion criteria
1. Neonates (Birth to 28 days)
2. Sex: Both sex
3. Neonates who are clinically diagnosed as sepsis
4. Control: Neonates with no symptoms or signs of infection. Sample was taken from the neonates because of suspicion of other diseases and no illness was detected subsequently. We also took blood for follow-up in neonate with no suspicion of infection and those having physiological jaundice.
Exclusion criteria
1. Neonates with gross congenital anomalies
2. Neonates with chromosomal abnormalities
3. Neonates with severe jaundice due to blood group (ABO, Rh) incompatibilities.
Total sample size was 60
Sampling technique
Purposive sampling. As per inclusion criteria the patient was enrolled in this study. The whole procedure was explained to the patient attendant and informed written consent was taken.
Laboratory assay
1. Neutrophil CD64 assay in flowcytometry technology
2. Complete blood count (Hb%, RBC count, haematocrit, TC, DC, and platelet count) and peripheral blood film (PBF) with IT ratio
3. Blood culture and sensitivity
Specimen collection
After taking informed written consent from attendant blood sample were obtained from peripheral venipuncture in all neonates within 24 hrs of admission. A total 3.5 ml venous blood was taken of which 1.5 ml was collected in EDTA tube for complete blood count, PBF and for neutrophil CD64 estimation. Another 2.0 ml for blood culture for the purposes of this study. Samples was remained acceptable for up to 24 hours after collection when held at room temperature (18-22oC) and for 48 hours when refrigerated (2-8ºC).
To maintain quality assurance and to make the study more authenticated the following steps were done-
1) At first 3 normal healthy neonate′s blood sample ware collected and the neutrophil CD64 expression was measured by BD FACS verse flow cytometer.
2) Then 5 cases were taken as per inclusion criteria, the data sheet was filled up and the laboratory tests were done. The result was compared with the expected outcome. After the pilot study, the original study was commenced.
Data collection
Data were collected by a pre designed proforma. Blood sample was obtained from patients suspected cases of neonatal sepsis or clinically sepsis. Patient information was obtained through using patient’s information sheet which involved questionnaire and clinical findings. Data editing, clearing and analysis was done by statistical package for social science (SPSS) 17.0. Sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV of neutrophil CD64 was calculate using specific formulas that is specified. Universal precaution was obtained. Gloves, lab coat, and safety glasses were worn when handling all blood products. Disposable plastic, glass, paper and gloves that contact blood were placed in a biohazard bag. Non-disposable materials at the end of working day were disinfected by autoclave. Pipette by mouth was avoided. Washing hands thoroughly was done after removal of personal protective devices used in handling specimens and kit reagents. Eating, drinking or smoking was avoided in designated working areas.
| Neutrophil CD64 | |||||
| Positive n=32 | Negative n=28 | p value | |||
| Age group | n | % | n | % | |
| 0-3 days | 19 | 59.38 | 11 | 39.29 | 0.19ns |
| > 3 days | 13 | 40.62 | 17 | 60.71 | |
| Sex | |||||
| Male | 18 | 56.25 | 17 | 60.71 | 0.72ns |
| Female | 14 | 43.75 | 11 | 39.29 | |
| Gestational age | |||||
| Preterm <37wks> | 27 | 84.38 | 14 | 50.00 | 0.004s |
| Term ≥ 37wks | 05 | 15.63 | 14 | 50.00 | |
| Birth weight | |||||
| Very low birth weight ≤ 1500 gm | 11 | 34.38 | 00 | 0.00 | |
| Low birth weight >1500-2499 gm | 15 | 46.88 | 09 | 32.14 | <0> |
| Normal weight ≥2500 gm | 06 | 18.75 | 19 | 67.86 | |
| PROM | |||||
| Yes | 24 | 75.00 | 06 | 21.43 | <0> |
| No | 08 | 25.00 | 22 | 78.57 | |
Table I: Neutrophil CD64 and demographic characteristics of study population (n=60).
Table I shows comparison between demographic characteristics with Neutrophil CD64. Age group 0-3 days 19(59.38%) were in neutrophil CD64 positive cases and 11(39.29%) in neutrophil CD64 negative group (p>0.05). Male were predominant, 18(56.25%) & 17(60.71%) in neutrophil CD64 positive and negative group (p>0.05). Gestational age preterm 27(84.38%) were in neutrophil CD64 positive cases and 14(50.0%) in neutrophil CD64
negative group. Birth weight, VLBW & LBW 26(81.26%) were in neutrophil CD64 positive cases and 09(32.14%) in neutrophil CD64 negative group (p<0> 13.96 7.40-22.20 14.98 7.60-20.90 14287.50 5000-36000 13475.0 7000-20000 8533.25 1750-29580 7000.50 3420-14000 0.22 0.08-0.42 0.12 0.08-0.22 PLT (x109/L) 159.37 20.0-550 264.25 125-800 Neutrophil CD64 (%) 36.03 5.01-96.67 4.85 0.61-7.90Parameters Case(n=40) Control(n=20) p value Mean Min-max ±SD Mean Min-max ±SD Hb (gm/dl) ±3.15 ±3.32 0.24ns TLC (/cumm of blood) ±8348.10 ±3625.47 0.68ns ANC (/cumm of blood) ±7563.92 ±2651.31 0.38ns IT ratio ±0.08 ±0.02 <0> ±110.44 ±152.18 0.001 s ±25.70 ±2.95 <0>
Table II: Laboratory test results of cases and control (n=60).
Table II shows mean difference between cases and control neonates with laboratory findings. Mean Hb were 13.96(±3.15) gm/dl in cases and 14.98(±3.32) gm/dl in controls (p>0.05). Mean total leukocytes count was 14287.50(±8348.10) /cumm of blood in cases and 13475.0(±3625.47) /cumm of blood in controls (p>0.05). Mean absolute neutrophil count was 8533.25(±7563.92) /cumm of blood in cases and 7000.50(±2651.31) /cumm
of blood in control (p>0.05). Mean IT ration was 0.22(±0.08) in cases and 0.12(±0.02) in control (p<0>Parameters Blood culture p value Positive Mean (±SD) Negative Mean (±SD) Neutrophil CD64 77.07(±15.07) 26.56(±13.46) <0>
Table III: Results of neutrophil CD64 detected by flow cytometer in culture positive and culture negative cases of neonatal sepsis (n=40).
Table III shows percentage of expression of neutrophil CD64 was higher in culture positive sepsis (77.07±15.07%) than culture negative sepsis
(26.56±13.46%). The difference was statistically highly significant (p<0> Sensitivity Specificity PPV NPV Accuracy Neutrophil CD64 100% 54.9% 28.13% 100% 61.67% IT ratio 66.6% 58.82% 22.22% 90.90% 60.0% PLT 50.0% 47.06% 20.59% 77.42% 47.69% IT ratio + CD64 100% 62.75% 32.14% 100% 68.33% PLT +CD64 100% 60.50% 27.50% 100% 65.0%
Table IV: Validity of different laboratory tests with blood culture (n=60).
Table IV shows that sensitivity of Neutrophil CD64 was 100%, specificity 54.9%, accuracy 61.67%, positive and negative predictive values were 28.13% and 100% respectively. Table shows that sensitivity of IT ratio was 66.6%, specificity 58.82%, accuracy 60.0%, positive and negative predictive values were 22.22% and 90.90% respectively. Table shows that sensitivity of PLT count was 50.0%, specificity 47.06%, accuracy 47.69%, positive and
negative predictive values were 20.59% and 77.42% respectively. Table shows that sensitivity of IT ratio+CD64 was 100% specificity 62.75
Diagnosis of neonatal sepsis is still a challenge, as there is no single reliable test for early diagnosis. Currently blood culture is the most reliable method for detection of bacterial infections. But the sensitivity of blood culture is low, longer time required for report (preliminary 24hours, final 7 days) and false negative result may be found. Culture positive sepsis is a small proportion of a larger group of clinical sepsis (with negative blood cultures). So it is clear that to manage neonates with sepsis properly, a single reliable marker of infection is needed, to avoid unnecessary antibiotic therapy. In this study, we tried to determine the neutrophil CD64 expression as an immunological marker for rapid diagnosis of neonatal sepsis. This study included 60 patients with a mean age of 5.9±6.49 days. There was 40 clinically diagnosed sepsis neonates and 20 control neonates who did not have any symptom or sign of sepsis. In sepsis group, early onset was observed more (62.5%) than that of late onset of sepsis (37.5%). This observation is consistent with the findings of others (Noor et al.,2008; Khaleda et al., 2010) in BSMMU. Preterm (82.5%) and low birth weight babies (77.5%) are more susceptible to infection. Higher susceptibility of infection in preterm and low birth weight babies might be due to low level of IgG and lower defense mechanism. There were significant differences in means of gestational age and birth weight between neonates. These findings showed that prevalence of infection in neonates is inversely related to gestational age and birth weight. Duration of premature rupture of membrane (PROM) for >24 hours have to be an important risk factor in neonatal septicemia because PROM poses of ascending infection to the fetus. In our study, PROM was 75% in septic neonates and none in control group. These findings are consistent with the study of Khaleda et al., (2010) and Kuruvilla et al., (1998). In this study, out of 40 clinically diagnosed neonatal sepsis, blood culture was found positive in 9 (22.5%) cases. Khaleda et al., (2010) in BSMMU, found 12% neonates as culture positive sepsis. In the present
study, there was high percentage of expression of CD64 on neutrophils in patients (36.03 ±25.70) when compared with controls (4.85±2.95) and also their percentage of expression was higher in culture positive sepsis (77.07±15.07%) than culture negative sepsis (26.56±13.46). These results are consistent with another study (Azza et al., 2013;). This may be due to
faulty sterile technique in collection procedure, insufficient sample volumes, intermittent or low-density bacteraemia, or suppression of bacterial growth by earlier antibiotic administration and delayed arrival of patients. Total leukocyte count (TLC) and absolute neutrophil count are of little clinical use in the diagnosis of neonatal sepsis because of wide variation in values. Neutropenia has been more common in association with sepsis, compared with neutrophilia (Rodwell et al.,1998), probably because of increased adherence to altered endothelial cells and utilization at the site of infection. IT ratio is the ratio between immature neutrophil count (band form) and the total neutrophil in a blood smear. As a marker of sepsis in newborn babies, the IT ratio should be >0.2(Khaleda et al., 2010). In the present study, I/T ratio >0.2 had a sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 66.6%, 58.82%, 22.22% and 90.90% respectively. While an I/T ratio >0.2 suggested by Khaleda et al., (2010) had a sensitivity of 100% specificity 04%, PPV13% and NPV of 100%. Specificity and positive predictive value were low because of large number of false positive results. Therefore, this parameter alone should not be evaluated for diagnostic purpose. Neonates with sepsis develop thrombocytopenia, possibly because of disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC) and the damaging effects of endotoxin on platelets. In this study, we found thrombocytopenia with cut off value<150x109>
Flow cytometric assessment of neutrophil CD64 may be considered as a rapid and reliable marker for the diagnosis of bacterial neonatal sepsis in comparison to other conventional and routine diagnostics markers. However, important issues of cost and availability are required to be evaluated in routine clinical setting.
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.
I would like to offer my testimony in the support. I have received through the peer review process and support the editorial office where they are to support young authors like me, encourage them to publish their work in your esteemed journals, and globalize and share knowledge globally. I really appreciate your journal, peer review, and editorial office.
Dear Agrippa Hilda- Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, "The peer review process was very quick and of high quality, which can also be seen in the articles in the journal. The collaboration with the editorial office was very good."
We found the peer review process quick and positive in its input. The support from the editorial officer has been very agile, always with the intention of improving the article and taking into account our subsequent corrections.
