The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case reporting guideline development

By J. Gagnier, G. Kienle, Douglas G. Altman, David Moher, H. Sox, David Riley. Journal of Medical Case Reports, 2013

1,994 citations recorded by the source corpus.

AbstractBackgroundA case report is a narrative that describes, for medical, scientific, or educational purposes, a medical problem experienced by one or more patients. Case reports written without guidance from reporting standards are insufficiently rigorous to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design. Primary Objective. Develop, disseminate, and implement systematic reporting guidelines for case reports.MethodsWe used a three-phase consensus process consisting of (1) pre-meeting literature review and interviews to generate items for the reporting guidelines, (2) a face-to-face consensus meeting to draft the reporting guidelines, and (3) post-meeting feedback, review, and pilot testing, followed by finalization of the case report guidelines.ResultsThis consensus process involved 27 participants and resulted in a 13-item checklist—a reporting guideline for case reports. The primary items of the checklist are title, key words, abstract, introduction, patient information, clinical findings, timeline, diagnostic assessment, therapeutic interventions, follow-up and outcomes, discussion, patient perspective, and informed consent.ConclusionsWe believe the implementation of the CARE (CAse REport) guidelines by medical journals will improve the completeness and transparency of published case reports and that the systematic aggregation of information from case reports will inform clinical study design, provide early signals of effectiveness and harms, and improve healthcare delivery.

Subfields: Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Sociology and Political Science, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7ca3a0ec010af3824cf0b243a8b355f167d8827a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

1. M. H. Murad
2. S. Sultan
3. S. Haffar
4. F. Bazerbachi

Citations in the corpus

• Methodological quality and synthesis of case series and case reports (2018, background): “This checklist encourages the explicit presentation of patient information, clinical findings, timeline, diagnostic assessment, therapeutic interventions, follow-up and outcomes.(3) Yet, systematic reviewers appraising the evidence for decision-makers require tools to assess the methodological quali”