Cracking the Code: A Practical Guide to Publishing in the ACG Case Reports Journal

This editorial provides practical guidance to authors on successfully publishing case reports in the ACG Case Reports Journal and similar publications. As members of the Editorial Board, our objectives are as follows:

• Identifying a compelling case report

• Strategies for staying organized throughout the submission process

• Tips for effective academic writing

• Ensuring high-quality tables and figures

• Navigating author and mentor roles

• Best practices for crafting response letters to editors and reviewers

CRAFT A STRONG CASE

Crafting a strong case report begins with a comprehensive literature search to determine whether similar cases have been published before. Use validated search engines such as PubMed, Google Scholar, and indexed journal databases to identify relevant reports. A judicious and thoughtful use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools, including emerging platforms such as Open Evidence, can assist in identifying references and structuring submissions in ways that might not have been immediately apparent.^1,2 If similar cases exist, highlight the unique aspects of your case—whether in presentation, diagnosis, or management—to enhance its value for readers. Peer reviewers typically conduct their own literature searches. Acknowledgement of the existing literature while emphasizing the novel aspects of your case is essential.³

Authors should carefully select a target journal by reviewing its scope and author guidelines to ensure that the case aligns well with the journal's audience and requirements. Consider the relevance of your case to both adult and pediatric gastroenterologists and hepatologists when choosing the journal. A thorough literature review strengthens key teaching points, highlights novel aspects of pathophysiology, and emphasizes advancements in diagnostic and treatment modalities. Placing yourself in the reviewer's position can help assess whether your case offers a fresh perspective on a known condition. Key questions to consider include the following:

• Has this case been previously published?

• What new insights does it provide?

• How does it contribute to the existing body of knowledge?

• What key takeaways can our readers gain from it?

Authors should carefully select a target journal by reviewing the journal's scope and author guidelines to ensure that the case aligns well with the journal's audience and requirements.

ACADEMIC WRITING

A well-structured case report begins with a concise introduction of the clinical scenario, followed by a clear and accurate patient history. When relevant, include details of medical, family, and surgical history to provide context and highlight predisposing risk factors.⁴ The case presentation should transition seamlessly into the discussion, highlighting its contribution to the literature. Key considerations include the following:

• Does the case represent a unique presentation of a disease?

• Is it a diagnostic challenge?

• Does it introduce a novel treatment approach?

• Is it a clinical problem addressed through multidisciplinary collaboration?

Seeking guidance from a mentor can help refine the case report, develop discussion pearls, strengthen its impact, and ensure that it meets publication standards.^3,5 Before submission, it is important to draft a strong cover letter and verify that your manuscript complies with all journal guidelines, including word count, number of figures and tables, and formatting requirements, to facilitate a smooth review process. Seeking feedback from a knowledgeable reviewer on syntax, sentence structure, and overall academic writing flow can enhance readability and reduce the likelihood of revision delays or rejection.⁶

For efficient reference management, consider the use of reference tools to organize citations and ease revisions after peer review.^5,7,8 Creating shared folders with coauthors that include reference articles and past revisions can help consolidate resources and streamline the revision process.³

HIGH-QUALITY FIGURES AND TABLES

Figures and tables are important elements of a comprehensive case report. When submitting images, ensure that they are of high quality and appropriate resolution for publication. Simple modifications, such as adding arrows or labels, can help highlight key features in endoscopic, pathology, or cross-sectional imaging. These visual markers help guide readers and enhance the educational value of the case.⁹ If an image does not meet the criteria for a full case report, it may still be considered for publication as an image-based article or video case report, providing authors with recognition for their contributions. Tables can effectively summarize differential diagnoses or review common causes of a particular presentation. In addition, timelines can be useful for illustrating a case's progression or tracking serum markers, such as in cases of drug-induced liver injury or adverse medication effects.

NAVIGATING ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND EXPECTATIONS WITH COAUTHORS AND MENTORS

Defining roles early

Establishing clear authorship roles from the beginning helps ensure a smooth writing and submission process. Before drafting the manuscript, coauthors should define their respective roles, expected contributions, and authorship order while ensuring that the proposed case report or series aligns with journal guidelines. Common contributions to ACG Case Reports Journal include drafting the case report, conducting the literature review, and preparing figures and tables for publication.¹⁰

Mentorship dynamics

Authors should engage in a formal discussion with their mentor contributing to the case. This conversation should outline expectations regarding mentorship, academic writing guidance, and timelines for draft review and submission. Establishing clear goals and expectations fosters a structured and productive collaboration while balancing mentorship with independent scholarly growth.

Ethical considerations

The ACG Case Reports Journal follows the ethical guidelines outlined in the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals.¹¹ This includes a statement confirming that informed patient consent was obtained for case publication. Mentors and lead authors are responsible for ensuring that all contributors meet the ICMJE authorship criteria. AI has applications across research, academic writing, and clinical care, including within gastroenterology and hepatology.^12–14 While AI tools are permitted in academic writing, any use of AI or large language models must be disclosed at the time of manuscript submission. In addition, we recommend that authors carefully verify all references and information provided by AI tools to ensure accuracy and reliability.

HOW TO NAVIGATE THE AUTHOR RESPONSE

Responding to reviewer comments is an important part of the revision process. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and dedicate significant time to evaluating manuscripts. Their feedback allows authors to improve the quality of their work and enhance its impact. The editorial board's role is to evaluate reviewer comments, synthesize them, and provide constructive feedback that benefits both the authors and the journal's audience.^1,3

A thoughtful response goes beyond simply agreeing with reviewer comments—it involves engaging in a meaningful dialogue. If a reviewer raises a point already addressed in the manuscript, it is appropriate to respectfully highlight this. If the author group disagrees with a comment, a clear and polite explanation of their reasoning should be provided. Should any point be unclear, the author group is encouraged to ask for clarification—the editorial team is available to assist.

Most importantly, ensure that each comment is addressed individually, making it easy for the editorial team to follow responses. Organizing each response under headings that correspond to the points raised by each reviewer and associate editor is helpful.⁴ Highlighting revisions directly in the manuscript, in accordance with author guidelines, allows editors to review revisions more efficiently.¹

Ultimately, the review process aims to refine the manuscript to its best version, rather than simply achieving acceptance. The editorial board seeks to balance clinical impact, novelty, and clarity to ensure that the manuscript provides value to readers. When there is a discrepancy between reviewer feedback and editorial recommendations, the board carefully considers both sides. If necessary, the editor-in-chief will engage in discussions with the authors to address these discrepancies, evaluating strengths, and opportunities for improvement in the manuscript. The final decision is made by the editor-in-chief, who considers the feedback from the author group, reviewers, and associate editor.

Writing a case report provides an opportunity to share novel findings with colleagues and can serve as a valuable stepping stone for future scholarly endeavors. The ACG Case Reports Journal editorial board hopes that authors found this guidance helpful and looks forward to receiving your submissions.

DISCLOSURES

Author contributions: HB Zaver, D. Abbas, and PS Harne contributed equally to the conceptualization, writing, review, and editing of the manuscript. HB Zaver is the article guarantor.

Financial disclosure: None to report.

Informed consent was obtained for this case report.