Case Study Publishing Guide
Patient History:
A short synopsis of clinical information about the patient. Focus should be on creating a patient profile that justifies and informs the decision to have a surgical intervention or autopsy and is relevant to the ultimate diagnosis.
Points to Consider:
- With what symptoms did the patient present?
- What did any biopsies or previous surgeries reveal?
- What are different avenues of treatment that could have been explored and why was this one specifically explored?
Materials and Methods/Hospital Course:
A summary of the pathological diagnosis procedure, with special attention paid to the role of the Pathologists’ Assistant.
Points to Consider:
- What procedure was specifically done?
- What were the relevant gross findings?
- Were any special techniques used in grossing the specimen?
- What sections were taken?
- What was the justification for these sections?
- CAP Protocol
- Question specific to the case
- Common convention
Results:
An outline of the microscopic and ancillary testing results, which connects the final diagnosis with the role of the PA in grossing the specimen.
Points to Consider:
- What did the microscopic results reveal?
- Were additional gross sections called for and why?
- How did the gross description or sections affect the staging?
- Were any special stains ordered and what did they reveal?
- Was any molecular testing done, what did it reveal, and why was it done?
- What was the justification for any ancillary studies?
Discussion:
A summary of the case with takeaway points with an analysis of the current scientific literature. Ideally, a Pathologists’ Assistant reading the paper should come away with increased knowledge of a disease process, an applicable skill, or a better appreciation for the grossing technique or ancillary testing of similar cases. This is also an appropriate place to discuss what further studies are warranted.
Points to Consider:
- What is written about this disease in the literature?
- How does the available literature on the topic relate to the gross approach to the specimen or case?
- How does the available literature support that the case is publication worthy? (Rare disease, atypical presentation, scarcity of studies)
- What are the take away points, specifically for Pathologists’ Assistants in their own practice?
- Is there anything that in retrospect could have been done differently or better?
- As pathology practices vary widely, could this case have been approached in a different way?
- Why was the chosen way of grossing ideal for the case?
- Would alternate grossing methodologies be appropriate in different circumstances?
- How could this be applied to future similar cases?
- Is there any call for additional research, especially within the gross or PA fields?