Asploro Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Case Reports is committed to providing authors with the best possible experience when it comes to submitting their work. Our team of experienced editors and support staff is available to help authors at every stage of the process, from manuscript preparation to final publication. We offer detailed author guidelines, resources, and support to ensure that your paper is of the highest quality and that it stands the best chance of being accepted for publication. With a fast and efficient peer-review process and a commitment to open access, Asploro is the ideal choice for authors looking to publish their work in a leading biomedical journal.
This double-blind peer review process helps ensure the impartiality and objectivity of the review, and allows the authors to receive constructive feedback from experts in their field. The review process typically takes 2 to 4 weeks, during which time the reviewers evaluate the scientific quality and validity of the research, and provide feedback to the authors on how to improve the manuscript. Once the review process is complete, the editorial team will make a decision on whether to accept, reject, or request revisions to the manuscript. The goal of this process is to ensure that only high-quality research is published, and that the authors have the opportunity to improve their work prior to publication.
It is important to follow ethical standards and best practices when submitting a manuscript for publication. Submitting work that has been published elsewhere, or is under consideration for publication elsewhere, may be considered a breach of ethical standards and may result in the rejection of your manuscript. It is also important to obtain approval from all co-authors and the responsible authorities at your institution before submitting your work for publication. By following these guidelines, you can ensure that your work is considered for publication with the highest standards of scientific integrity and ethics.
This helps to ensure that the journal only publishes high-quality, relevant research, and that the peer-review process is focused on articles that have a strong chance of being accepted for publication. By conducting a pre-review screening process, the journal can reduce the amount of time and effort that is spent on peer-reviewing articles that do not meet the standards or scope of the journal, saving time for both authors and reviewers. This helps to streamline the publication process and ensures that authors receive feedback on their work in a timely manner.
The authors should clearly present their research findings and should write the article in a manner that makes it easily understandable to a broad audience. The language used in the article should be clear and concise, and the information should be presented in a way that is accessible to people with varying levels of scientific knowledge. This helps to ensure that the research can be communicated to a wider audience, including those who may not be familiar with the specific field or terminology.
Formats for Asploro Open-Access Publication Contributions
- Research Articles
- Case Report and Case Series
- Review Articles
- Clinical Image
- Short Communication
- Special Articles
- Literature Review
- List the full names and institutional addresses for all authors
- Abstract – The Abstract should not exceed 350 words. Please minimize the use of abbreviations in the abstract.
- Keywords – More than 50% of journal traffic comes directly from Google, Google Scholar, and other search engines. Asploro Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Case Reports does everything possible to ensure that all research content is visible and high ranking in the search results of Google and other engines.
To increase the article’s search engine discoverability, please Include keywords in your title (1-2), abstract (2-3), and keyword fields (5-12).
- List of abbreviations – If abbreviations are used in the text they should be defined in the text.
- Background/Introduction – The Background section should explain the background to the study, its aims, a summary of the existing literature and its contribution to the field.
- Methods – The author should include the methods and materials used in the manuscript. The authors should explain the experimental protocols clearly and also should mention the entire process properly.
- Results – This should include the findings of the study.
- Discussion – The author should discuss the suggestions of the findings in the context of existing research and highlight the restrictions of the study.
- Conclusions – This should state clearly the main conclusions and provide an explanation of the importance and relevance of the study reported
- Reference list – References follow the Vancouver reference style, i.e. numbered sequentially as they occur in the text and ordered numerically in the reference list.
All citations mentioned in the text, tables or figures must be listed in the reference list. If cited in tables or figure legends, number according to the first identification of the table or figure in the text. The authors are responsible for the accuracy of the references.
Please see below for examples of reference content requirements.
Bennett JE, Stevens GA, Mathers CD, Bonita R, Rehm J, Kruk ME, Riley LM, Dain K, Kengne AP, Chalkidou K, Beagley J, Kishore SP, Chen W, Saxena S, Bettcher DW, Grove JT, Beaglehole R, Ezzati M. NCD Countdown 2030: worldwide trends in non-communicable disease mortality and progress towards Sustainable Development Goal target 3.4. Lancet. 2018 Sep 22;392(10152):1072-1088. [PMID: 30264707]
Author AA. Title of book. Edition [if not first]. Place of publication: Publisher; Year of publication. Pagination.
Example: Ambulance Victoria. Ambulance Victoria clinical practice guidelines for ambulance and MICA paramedics. Doncaster (AU): Ambulance Victoria; 2014. 349 p.
Chapter in a Book
Bennett AE, Smith GA, Mathews CD. The Diabetes. In: Davidson H (ed). The Diabetes, Vol 3, 2nd edn. New York: Publishing Press, 1969; 34–78.
Cancer-Pain.org [homepage on the internet]. New York: Association of Cancer Online Resources, Inc.; c2000–01 [Cited 2015 May 11]. Available from: http://www.cancer-pain.org/.
Website / Homepage
Author / organisation’s name. Title of the page [Internet]. Place of publication: Publisher; Date or year of publication [updated YYYY Mon DD; cited YYYY Mon DD]. Available from: URL
Example: Diabetes Australia. Diabetes globally [Internet]. Canberra ACT: Diabetes Australia; 2012 [updated 2012 Jun 15; cited 2019 Nov 5]. Available from: http://www.diabetesaustralia.com.au/en/Understanding-Diabetes/Diabetes-Globally/.
- Acknowledgment – Please be as brief as possible
- Funding Information – All sources of funding for the research reported should be declared.
- Declaration of interests
Formats for Asploro Open-Access Publication Contributions:
Asploro Open-Access Publications accepts the following: Original Articles, Reviews, Abstracts, Addendums, Announcements, Article-Commentaries, Book Reviews, Rapid Communications, Letter to the Editor, Annual Meeting Abstracts, Case-Reports, Discussions, Orations, Product Reviews, Hypotheses and Analyses.
Research articles should report on original primary research but may report on systematic reviews of published research provided they adhere to the appropriate reporting guidelines.
Studies reporting descriptive results from a single institution will only be considered if analogous data have not been previously published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Original research articles must include a structured abstract (maximum 350 words), should not exceed 4000 words of text. Qualitative research papers may consist of up to 5000 words.
Case Report and Case Series:
Case reports submitted to Asploro Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Case Reports should make a contribution to medical knowledge and must have educational value or highlight the need for a change in clinical practice or diagnostic/prognostic approaches.
Case reports should include relevant positive and negative findings from history, examination, and investigation, and can include clinical images, provided these are accompanied by a statement that written consent to publish was obtained from the patient(s).
Case Report must include a structured abstract (maximum 350 words), should not exceed 2500 words of text.up to 3500 words.
6 Tables or less and 10 Figure or Less.
Checklist for a Case Report
- Title – The diagnosis or intervention of primary focus followed by the words “case report”.
- Key Words – 4 to 8 key words that identify diagnoses or interventions in this case report (including “case report”).
- Abstract – (structured or unstructured)
- Introduction – What is unique about this case and what does it add to the scientific literature?
- The patient’s main concerns and important clinical findings.
- The primary diagnoses, interventions, and outcomes.
- Conclusion – What are one or more “take-away” lessons from this case report?
- Introduction – Briefly summarizes why this case is unique and may include medical literature references.
- Patient Information
- De-identified patient specific information.
- Primary concerns and symptoms of the patient.
- Medical, family, and psychosocial history including relevant genetic information.
- Relevant past interventions and their outcomes.
- Clinical Findings – Describe significant physical examination (PE) and important clinical findings.
- Timeline – Historical and current information (figure or table).
- Diagnostic Assessment
- Diagnostic methods (PE, laboratory testing, imaging, surveys).
- Diagnostic challenges.
- Diagnosis (including other diagnoses considered).
- Prognostic characteristics when applicable.
- Therapeutic Intervention
- Types of therapeutic intervention (pharmacologic, surgical, preventive).
- Administration of therapeutic intervention (dosage, strength, duration).
- Changes in therapeutic interventions with explanations.
- Follow-up and Outcomes
- Clinician- and patient-assessed outcomes if available.
- Important follow-up diagnostic and other test results.
- Intervention adherence and tolerability. (How was this assessed?)
- Adverse and unanticipated events.
- Strengths and limitations in your approach to this case.
- Discussion of the relevant medical literature.
- The rationale for your conclusions.
- The primary “take-away” lessons from this case report (without references) in a one paragraph conclusion.
- Patient Perspective – The patient should share their perspective on the treatment(s) they received.
- Informed Consent – The patient should give informed consent. (Provide if requested.)
Review articles are written based mostly on secondary data that is falling in line with the content of the journal. They are brief, yet critical discussions on a specific aspect of the subject concerned. Reviews generally start with the statement of the problem with a brief abstract of 350 words, 8-10 keywords, and should not exceed 5,000 words of text. Introduction generally brings the issue forward to the readers followed by an analytical discussion with the help of necessary tables, graphs, pictures, and illustrations wherever necessary. It summarizes the topic with a conclusion. All the statements or observations in the review articles must be based on necessary citations, with complete references.
- The ideal Clinical Images provides visual information that will be useful to other clinicians.
- Clinical Images should be interesting, educational, and respectful of the patient.
- The authors must obtain signed informed consent for publication electronically. If you have taken consent appropriately, masking is not necessary to anonymize patients.
- The authors must have been involved in the care of the patient.
- Use no more than 500 words and the text should include a brief patient history and put the high-quality image in context, explaining what the image shows, why it is of interest to the general reader, and the outcome of the patient.
- Please also write a short single best answer question of approximately 20 words with four short answers to create an accompanying Picture Quiz. These questions should be appropriate for a non-specialist medical doctor within the first five years of practice.
- Short Communications are short papers that present original and significant material for rapid dissemination.
- Provide Key pointers to the reader.
- The paper should contain an abstract and it should be limited to 100 words.
- The Layout should differ from original and review articles.
- It is devoid of separate sections when compared to full length articles.
- Short communications are limited to 3000 words and are not subdivided.
- Usage of figures or tables should be restricted to six (combined)
- References must be restricted to 25.
- 20 words for each equation.
Editorials are brief commentaries on a currently published article/issue on the Journal topics. Editorial office may approach for any such works and authors must submit it within 20days from the date of receiving an invitation.
Up to 1200 words and 15 references, 2 tables or figures
Articles such as guidelines, history, education, surveys etc. that do not fit one of the other article types. Approval from the Editorial Office is required prior to submission. Special Articles are up to 3500 words with up to 3-5 figures/tables and include an unstructured Summary up to 250 words.
Submissions which ignore this guidance on word count or a number of figures/tables may be returned without being assessed. Authors wishing to submit manuscripts with figures/tables more than the recommended number should justify this during submission.
For review articles and clinical investigations, it is possible to include supplementary data (such as additional references for a review, expanded tables of results or additional images for investigations) for online publication only. Authors should make clear in their submission letter which files are to be considered for online-only publication.
1. Background literature about the broad research topic to introduce the readers to the field of study.
2. Recent progress on the study topic which can be organized thematically or chronologically. Ideally, separate themes should be discussed in a chronological manner to describe how research in the field has evolved over time and to highlight the progress in the field.
3. The review should include a comparison and contrast of different studies. Discussing the controversial aspects helps to identify the main gaps that need to be worked upon. This is essential for defining the problem statement of the study and highlighting the significance of the research under question.
4. Once a problem statement has been defined, the strengths and pitfalls of other studies that have tackled the problem statement should be discussed. This is important for outlining the need and novelty of the research.
5. Make sure that the total words should not exceed 6000 words.
6. The references should be in Vancouver citing and referencing format.
1. Do not summarize the focal article; just give the reference. Assume the reader has just read it. Move directly to identifying the key issues you want to raise.
2. Do not include general praise for the focal article.
3. Use only essential citations. For commentary purposes, cite only works absolutely essential to support your point.
4. Use a short title that emphasizes your key message. (It should be clear in context that all commentaries are a reaction to a particular paper).
5. Do not include an abstract.
6. Make clear your take-home message.
7. Make sure that the total words should not exceed 2500 words, 20 references, no more than 2 figures/tables.
8. The references should be in Vancouver citing and referencing format.
Submit the names and institutional e-mail addresses of several potential referees. Note that the editor retains the sole right to decide whether or not the suggested reviewers are used.
Submissions are judged by the Editorial Board and are subject to an external peer review process using the double-blind method whereby the reviewers of the paper won’t get to know the identity of the author(s), and the author(s) won’t get to know the identity of the reviewer.
Article Processing Charge
All articles published in Asploro Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Case Reports are open access and freely available online, immediately upon publication. This is made possible by an article-processing charge (APC) that covers the range of publishing services we provide. A portion of the APC will be reinvested on the services provided by the Editorial Screening team, the Editorial team, the Production team, the Proofing team, the Editorial Quality Assurance team, the Indexing teams that liaise with all major index services, and the Support teams. When your manuscript is editorially accepted and before publication, APC is charged to you, institution or employer.
Asploro Journal of Biomedical and Clinical Case Reports’ publication charge for authors submitting directly to the journal is $500.
The publication charge for authors submitting clinical images or clinical videos is $200.
If an author would like their article to be published, but cannot afford the APC, then individual waiver requests are considered on a case-by-case basis and may be granted in cases of genuine need.
A growing number of universities, funding organizations and government agencies maintain funds to assist researchers with open-access publication fees. Authors should contact their home institutions and funding organizations about options for assistance with open-access fees.
Funding & NIH Funding
Details of all funding sources for the work in question should be given in a separate section entitled ‘Funding’. This should appear before the ‘Acknowledgements’ section.
Reprints (minimum 50) can be purchased by all co-authors. For inquiries about reprints, please contact the Asploro team at firstname.lastname@example.org
At Asploro all the articles are published under Creative Commons License. Any further distribution or use of content published under CC BY 4.0 must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.