Author Guidelines for Case Report Submissions

Journal of the Iranian Dental Association (JIDA)

Overview
JIDA encourages the submission of high-quality case reports that offer meaningful contributions to clinical practice, particularly those that illuminate rare presentations, diagnostic dilemmas, therapeutic innovations, or educational insights. To ensure consistency, transparency, and scholarly value, all case reports must be structured according to the CARE (CAse REport) guidelines.

1. Required Components

Authors must organize their manuscript using the following CARE-compliant sections. Each section should be clearly labeled and presented in logical sequence to facilitate peer review and reader comprehension.

• Title
  The title must include the phrase “Case Report” and succinctly reflect the central clinical issue or condition addressed.
• Abstract
  Provide a structured abstract with the following subheadings:
  • Background: Provide a concise overview of the clinical background relevant to the case, including the nature of the condition, its prevalence, and any unique or noteworthy aspects that justify its reporting. Clearly articulate the rationale for presenting this specific case—such as its rarity, diagnostic complexity, therapeutic innovation, or educational value—and explain how it contributes to existing literature or enhances clinical understanding in dental practice.
  • Case Presentation: Present a concise yet comprehensive overview of the patient’s clinical presentation, including initial symptoms, relevant medical and dental history, and key findings from physical and radiographic examinations. Describe the diagnostic pathway, outlining the tests performed, differential diagnoses considered, and the rationale leading to the final diagnosis. Summarize the therapeutic approach, detailing the interventions undertaken—such as surgical procedures, pharmacologic management, or supportive care—and explain the clinical reasoning behind each decision.
  • Conclusion: Summarize the principal insights gained from the case, emphasizing its contribution to clinical knowledge, diagnostic reasoning, or therapeutic decision-making. Highlight how the case informs or reinforces best practices, addresses gaps in current understanding, or offers practical lessons for dental professionals. The conclusion should clearly articulate the broader implications for patient care, education, or future research.
    The abstract should not exceed 250 words.

• Keywords
  Include 3–6 keywords that accurately represent the case and enhance discoverability in indexing databases.

   

• Introduction
  The introduction should provide a focused overview of the clinical background relevant to the case, including the nature of the condition, its typical presentation, and any known challenges in diagnosis or management. Authors should clearly articulate the significance of the case—such as its rarity, atypical features, or contribution to clinical decision-making—and explain why it merits publication. Emphasis should be placed on the case’s relevance to dental practice, including how it may inform future patient care, enhance clinical awareness, or stimulate further research.
• Case Presentation
  This section should be organized under the following subheadings:
  • Patient Information:

Provide a detailed account of the patient’s demographic information, including age and sex, followed by relevant medical and dental history that may influence diagnosis or treatment. Clearly describe the presenting symptoms and chief complaint, along with any pertinent social, behavioral, or family history that contributes to the clinical context. This section should offer enough background to understand the patient’s overall health status and the factors that may have shaped the clinical course.

Informed Consent:

Include a clear and explicit statement confirming that written informed consent for publication was obtained from the patient or, when applicable, from a legally authorized representative. This consent must cover the use of clinical details, images, and any potentially identifiable information. The statement should appear within the manuscript under the “Case Presentation” section and be supported by a signed consent form submitted as a separate document during the submission process.

Clinical Findings:

Provide a detailed account of the patient’s clinical presentation, including findings from physical examination, both intraoral and extraoral. Describe any notable features such as swelling, tenderness, lesions, asymmetry, or functional limitations. Include relevant radiographic or imaging observations—such as panoramic radiographs, cone-beam CT scans, or other modalities—highlighting structural abnormalities, lesion characteristics, or anatomical relationships that contributed to diagnosis or treatment planning. This section should offer a clear and objective depiction of the clinical scenario as observed by the practitioner.

• Timeline:

Provide a clear and structured chronological account of the patient’s clinical journey, beginning with the onset and progression of symptoms. Detail the sequence of diagnostic steps, including initial assessments, investigations, and key milestones that led to the final diagnosis. Describe the timing and nature of therapeutic interventions, such as procedures, medications, or other treatments, and outline the follow-up process, including monitoring strategies, outcomes, and any changes in the patient’s condition over time. This timeline should offer a coherent narrative that reflects the clinical decision-making process and facilitates understanding of the case’s evolution.

• Diagnostic Assessment:

Provide a comprehensive account of the diagnostic process, detailing all procedures and investigations undertaken to reach the final diagnosis. This should include laboratory tests (e.g., hematologic, microbiologic, or biochemical analyses), imaging studies (such as radiographs, cone-beam CT, MRI, or ultrasound), and histopathological examinations where applicable. Clearly describe the findings from each modality and explain how they contributed to narrowing the differential diagnosis. Discuss the clinical reasoning behind the selection of tests and the exclusion of alternative diagnoses, emphasizing the stepwise approach and any challenges encountered during the diagnostic workup.

• Therapeutic Intervention:

Provide a detailed information of the therapeutic strategy implemented for the patient, beginning with the overall treatment plan and its intended objectives. Describe all clinical procedures performed, including surgical interventions, restorative techniques, or other operative measures, specifying materials used and procedural steps where relevant. List any medications prescribed, including dosages, duration, and indications. Clearly explain the rationale behind each clinical decision, referencing diagnostic findings, patient-specific considerations, and evidence-based guidelines where applicable. This section should demonstrate thoughtful clinical reasoning and justify the chosen approach in the context of the patient’s condition and treatment goals.

• Follow-up and Outcomes:

Provide a thorough account of the patient’s clinical response following the implemented treatment, including both immediate and longer-term outcomes. Describe any improvements in symptoms, restoration of function, or resolution of pathology, supported by follow-up examinations or imaging when applicable. Clearly document any complications, adverse effects, or unexpected developments that occurred during or after treatment. Conclude with an assessment of the patient’s long-term prognosis, noting anticipated outcomes, ongoing management needs, or potential for recurrence. This section should reflect the effectiveness and limitations of the therapeutic approach within the context of the individual case.

• Patient Perspective (optional):

If available and appropriate, include a concise reflection from the patient that captures their personal experience throughout the clinical course. This may address their initial concerns, emotional response to diagnosis, perception of the treatment process, and satisfaction with the outcome. The patient’s perspective can offer valuable insight into the human dimension of care, enhance the educational value of the report, and foster empathy among practitioners. Ensure that any quoted material is anonymized and included only with explicit consent.

• Discussion
  Critically analyze the case within the framework of existing literature, identifying how it aligns with, diverges from, or expands upon previously reported cases. Highlight any unique clinical features, diagnostic challenges, or therapeutic approaches that distinguish the case and justify its publication. Compare and contrast the findings with similar reports, citing relevant studies to contextualize the discussion. Explore the broader clinical implications, including how the case may influence diagnostic reasoning, treatment planning, or patient management in dental practice. Acknowledge any limitations—such as sample size, lack of generalizability, or incomplete follow-up—that may affect interpretation. Conclude by emphasizing the case’s contribution to current knowledge, its educational value, and its potential to inform future research or clinical guidelines.

• Conclusion
  Summarize the key learning points, clinical relevance, and potential implications for future practice or research.
• References
  References must be formatted according to the Vancouver style, ensuring consistency and adherence to international standards for biomedical citation. Authors are strongly encouraged to cite recent, peer-reviewed journal articles that reflect current evidence and best practices. Textbooks and non-peer-reviewed sources should be avoided unless they provide essential foundational context that cannot be sourced elsewhere. All cited materials must be clearly accessible online—preferably through indexed databases or direct URLs—to support transparency, facilitate verification, and uphold the scholarly integrity of the manuscript.

2. Submission Requirements

To ensure smooth processing and review, authors must adhere to the following technical and ethical requirements:

• File Format:

Manuscripts must be prepared and submitted in Microsoft Word format, using either the .doc or .docx file extension. This ensures compatibility with the journal’s editorial and peer review systems, facilitates accurate formatting, and allows for efficient annotation during the review process. Authors should avoid submitting PDFs, scanned documents, or alternative file types unless specifically requested by the editorial office

Figures:

Authors must include high-quality visual materials that enhance the clarity and educational value of the case report. All images—whether clinical photographs, radiographs, or procedural illustrations—should be submitted in high resolution, with a minimum of 300 dots per inch (dpi) to ensure print and digital clarity. Each image must be properly labeled (e.g., Figure 1, Figure 2) and referenced appropriately within the manuscript text. Accompany each figure with a concise, descriptive legend that explains its content, relevance, and any notable features. Ensure that patient identifiers are removed or obscured to maintain confidentiality

Tables:

All tables included in the manuscript must be numbered sequentially in the order they appear (e.g., Table 1, Table 2, etc.) to maintain clarity and consistency. Each table should be accompanied by a concise, informative title that accurately reflects its content and purpose. Tables must be referenced explicitly within the main text to guide the reader and contextualize the data presented. Ensure that tables are formatted clearly, with appropriate column headings, units of measurement, and explanatory footnotes where necessary. Avoid duplicating information already presented in figures or the narrative unless it serves a distinct analytical purpose

Ethics Approval:

If applicable, authors must include documentation confirming that the case report was reviewed and approved by an institutional ethics committee or equivalent regulatory body. This is particularly important when the case involves experimental procedures, vulnerable populations, or data collected as part of a broader research protocol. The ethics approval statement should appear within the manuscript, specifying the name of the approving institution, reference number (if available), and date of approval. This documentation reinforces the ethical integrity of the report and ensures compliance with international standards for human subject research.

Consent Documentation:

Authors are required to upload a signed patient consent form confirming that the individual has granted explicit permission for the publication of their clinical information, images, and any potentially identifiable details. This consent must be obtained prior to submission and should reflect the patient’s understanding of the scope and purpose of publication. The signed form must be submitted as a separate document alongside the manuscript and will be retained by the editorial office for ethical compliance. Consent is mandatory for all case reports, regardless of whether identifying features are present.

CARE Checklist:

 Authors should submit a completed CARE checklist as a supplementary document alongside the manuscript. This checklist serves as a standardized tool to verify that all essential elements of the CARE reporting framework have been addressed within the case report. It enhances transparency, facilitates editorial and peer review, and ensures consistency with international best practices for clinical case documentation. The checklist should be filled out accurately, referencing specific sections of the manuscript where each item is addressed, and submitted in its original format or as provided by the journal.

• Language:

Manuscripts must be written in clear, precise, and formal academic English that reflects scholarly standards and professional tone. Authors should ensure grammatical accuracy, logical flow, and appropriate use of discipline-specific terminology. Informal expressions, colloquialisms, idiomatic phrases, and ambiguous or conversational language must be strictly avoided. The writing should be objective, coherent, and tailored to an international academic audience, facilitating peer review and enhancing the manuscript’s credibility and impact.

3. Referencing Style

All references must adhere strictly to the Vancouver citation style, ensuring consistency with international biomedical publishing standards. Authors should prioritize citing recent, peer-reviewed journal articles that reflect current evidence and scholarly consensus. Textbooks and other non-peer-reviewed sources should be avoided unless they provide indispensable historical or foundational context not available elsewhere. To promote transparency and facilitate verification, all references must be accessible online—preferably through indexed databases—and should include a DOI or direct URL whenever possible.

4. Editorial Review Process

All submissions undergo rigorous peer review by subject-matter experts. Manuscripts that do not conform to the CARE structure, ethical standards, or JIDA formatting guidelines may be returned to authors for revision or rejected without review. Authors are encouraged to ensure completeness, clarity, and scholarly integrity before submission.