ReviewJournal of conservative dentistry and endodontics2026
Getting your publication right - Part 2 - Structuring a research manuscript: A guide to writing a case report.
Review in Journal of conservative dentistry and endodontics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Case reports serve as a crucial medium for documenting rare presentations, novel diagnostic approaches, innovative treatment protocols, and unexpected outcomes encountered in routine practice. Due to a lack of structure and guidelines, published case reports suffered from variability and reliability. With the evolution of CARE (CAse REport) guidelines, medical reporting became more structured. Objective: This paper aims to present a systematic and well-defined roadmap to facilitate the preparation of clinical dental case reports, structured on the framework of the CARE guidelines. Methods: A comprehensive literature review of case report methodology, the evolution of clinical documentation, and the CARE reporting guidelines was conducted in peer-reviewed sources and reporting guideline repositories. The information was then presented in a narrative form to provide the reader with information on how reporting guidance can be utilized. Results: The CARE checklist is a simple framework with reporting features that, in addition to being straightforward, enhance transparency, clinical interpretability, and relevance. This writing approach chronologically chronicles from the title, abstract, to patient perspective and consent, allows the authors to present diagnostic reasoning, interventions, and outcomes in an ethical, educational manner that reviewers can appraise. Conclusion: When systematically constructed while adhering to ethical standards, dental case reports can be a valuable form of clinical evidence. Case reports can rationalize need-based and individual case-specific decision-making, when evidence is limited and can draw attention to observations that merit scope for future research. The guidelines outlined here are aimed at assisting authors to prepare comprehensive and publication-ready dental case reports in accordance with the CARE guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.