AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-8794/255
Assistant Vice President for Clinical Education Development, A.T. Still University Mesa, Arizona, United States.
*Corresponding Author: Leonard B. Goldstein, Assistant Vice President for Clinical Education Development, A.T. Still University Mesa, Arizona, United States.
Citation: Ethan Hopkins, William Nguyen, James F. Keane, Leonard B. Goldstein, (2025), Scoping Review of Prophylactic Treatments for Reducing Migraine Occurrences, Clinical Medical Reviews and Reports, 7(2); DOI:10.31579/2690-8794/255
Copyright: © 2025, Leonard B. Goldstein. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 25 February 2025 | Accepted: 04 March 2025 | Published: 11 March 2025
Keywords: migraine; prophylactic treatment; osteopathic manipulative treatment; CGRP inhibitors; non-pharmacologic therapy; migraine prevention
Background:
Migraine is a prevalent neurological disorder with significant socioeconomic and quality-of-life burdens. While acute treatments exist, prophylactic therapies are essential to reducing monthly migraine days (MMDs). This scoping review evaluates pharmacologic, non-pharmacologic, and procedural interventions for migraine prevention, with an emphasis on osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT), supplements, and emerging therapies.
Methods:
A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, OSTMED.Dr, Still OneSearch, CINAHL, ClinicalKey, and Scopus using standardized keywords. Grey literature sources, including major headache organizations, were also reviewed. Studies were included if they examined prophylactic migraine treatments and reported changes in MMDs.
Results:
Among pharmacologic interventions, onabotulinumtoxinA (Botox) and CGRP inhibitors demonstrated the greatest reductions in MMDs. Non-pharmacologic approaches, including OMT, acupuncture, and neuromodulation, showed varying effectiveness, often as adjunct therapies. Nutraceuticals, such as magnesium and riboflavin, provided modest benefits. Variability in study design, patient populations, and outcome measures impacted direct comparisons.
Conclusion:
A range of prophylactic treatments exist for reducing MMDs, with efficacy varying by patient population. While pharmacologic options remain primary, non-pharmacologic and procedural therapies offer promising alternatives. Future research should standardize outcome measures and explore personalized treatment approaches.
Migraine is one of the most prevalent neurological disorders, and is a serious public health concern, affecting approximately 1 out of every 6 Americans. [1]. Although migraine is considered a benign disorder, the socioeconomic burden of migraine is substantial, with migraine-related lost productivity incurring extensive annual costs. [ -4]The clinical presentation of migraines is highly variable among individuals but commonly includes recurrent, intense unilateral throbbing headaches, often accompanied by anorexia, nausea, vomiting, phonophobia, and photophobia. [5-6] Acute migraine attacks are typically divided into four phases—prodrome, aura, headache, and postdrome—that follow a sequential progression. However, the specific manifestation, overlap, duration, and intensity of these phases can vary significantly between individuals and even across episodes. [7]The prodrome phase occurs hours to days before headache onset and is characterized by subtle warning signs like mood changes, neck stiffness, fatigue, increased urination and food cravings. [8] The aura phase, when present, manifests as transient neurological symptoms such as visual, sensory, or motor disturbances that typically develop within an hour of headache onset. [9] The headache phase is the most debilitating, marked by severe pain and sensitivity to external stimuli. Finally, the postdrome phase, often referred to as the "migraine hangover," is associated with lingering symptoms, including fatigue, difficulty concentrating, mood disturbances, and residual head discomfort.[10] Migraine attacks can be triggered by a variety of factors, including stress, illness, emotions, and hormonal fluctuations, such as those occurring during the menstrual cycle.Emerging research has advanced our understanding of migraine pathophysiology, shedding light on underlying mechanisms. Cortical spreading depression (CSD), a self-propagating wave of neuronal and glial depolarization across the cerebral cortex, has been implicated as a key driver of migraines. CSD is hypothesized to generate the aura phase, activate trigeminal nerve afferents, and disrupt the blood-brain barrier through matrix metalloproteinase activation and upregulation.[8] Additionally, while vasodilation of dural and extracranial vessels has long been considered central to migraine pain, recent findings challenge this theory, suggesting that other mechanisms may play a more pivotal role. [9]The pathophysiology of migraines involves the activation of the trigeminal vascular system. While vasodilation of cranial blood vessels is no longer considered the primary or sole mechanism behind migraines, our current understanding suggests that blood vessels still play a role. The reason for this logic is that blood vessels release and respond to various mediators, such as growth factors, cytokines, ATP, and NO, and many of these mediators are also known to have actions in neurons that can lead to migraines. On the other hand, blood vessels are capable of facilitating bi-directional communication with the nervous system through the release of substances like norepinephrine and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), which directly impact the cells present in the vessels. This means that various normal and pathological processes taking place within and among vascular cells can serve as channels for interaction between the vascular system and the nervous system, without requiring alterations in vascular tone. CGRP is a 37-amino acid neuropeptide that is produced as a consequence of alternative RNA processing of the calcitonin gene. It is known to have strong vasodilatory effects, and it is mainly released from C and Aδ sensory fibers. [] CGRP receptors are located in various neuronal tissues, such as the trigeminal ganglion, cerebral and meningeal vasculature, trigeminal nucleus caudalis (located in the brainstem) and the thalamus. Activation of these receptors within the trigeminovascular system plays an important role in the events that ultimately lead to the experience of pain with migraines, as evidenced by the ability of IV administered exogenous CGRP to cause migraine-like headaches. [ - ] After nerve stimulation, the release of CGRP occurs through calcium-dependent exocytosis from its storage vesicles. Once released, it is hypothesized that CGRP binds to CGRP receptors, and relays migraine pain through the brainstem into the brain via the trigeminovascular system. With this rather new discovery between the correlation of CGRP and migraines, many new studies have explored the efficacy of CGRP antagonists, specifically in comparison to other preventative medications. In fact, as of April 23, 2023, the FDA has approved expanding the indication of QULIPTA (atogepant) for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. Atogepant has shown to significantly reduce monthly migraine days, monthly headache days, and monthly medication use days in comparison to a placebo, with no significant difference in adverse effects.While CGRP antagonists as well as other medication classes like the serotonin receptor agonists (triptans) have demonstrated efficacy in the acute treatment of migraines, the focus of this scoping review is distinct. This review aims to explore and evaluate a broad range of preventive interventions aimed at reducing the frequency of migraine attacks. These interventions include pharmacological agents, such as beta-blockers, antiepileptic drugs, and CGRP inhibitors, as well as non-pharmacological approaches, such as osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT), acupuncture, and mindfulness-based therapies. Additionally, the review will assess the potential of nutraceuticals, including magnesium, riboflavin (vitamin B2), and coenzyme Q10, as well as dietary modifications and lifestyle interventions.The effectiveness of these preventive strategies will be evaluated based on their ability to reduce monthly migraine days (MMDs). It is important to note that this review will not focus on interventions aimed at decreasing the intensity or severity of migraine symptoms, which are often measured using tools such as the Headache Impact Test-6 (HIT-6) or the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) scores. By concentrating on MMD reduction, this review seeks to provide a targeted analysis of diverse approaches to migraine prevention, contributing to a deeper understanding of their roles in long-term management.
A comprehensive search strategy has been developed in consultation with a medical librarian (Leslie Golamb) to ensure breadth and relevance. The search began with an exploration of grey literature sources to refine keyword selection and identify additional relevant studies. Google was used for preliminary searches to explore osteopathic treatments for chronic migraines, uncover relevant grey literature, and establish key search terms. Information was gathered from reputable organizations, including the American Migraine Foundation, the Association of Migraine Disorders, the National Headache Foundation, and the American Academy of Neurology. These sources provided insights into current best practices, research priorities, and established approaches to migraine prophylaxis, helping to inform the direction of the database search.Following this preliminary investigation, systematic searches were conducted across multiple academic databases, including PubMed, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, OSTMED. Dr, Still One Search, CINAHL, Clinical Key, and Scopus. A standardized set of search terms was applied across databases to ensure consistency and comprehensive coverage. These included variations of "migraine," "migraine headache," "prophylactic treatment," "preventive treatment," "long-term treatment," "therapy," "intervention," "management," and "osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT)." In PubMed, searches utilized Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) in combination with these keywords, while in other databases, similar Boolean strategies were employed to maximize relevant results. Filters were applied to restrict results to studies published from 2010 onward, with Scopus searches further refined to include only journal articles, conference proceedings, and trade journals from 2014 onward. ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane Library were specifically searched for ongoing or completed clinical trials and systematic reviews evaluating OMT as a migraine prophylaxis. OSTMED. Dr, an osteopathic-focused database, was searched using the keyword “migraine headache.” Broad searches in Still One Search, CINAHL, and Clinical Key incorporated the same standardized terms, with filters applied for peer-reviewed journal articles. By maintaining consistency in search terminology, the review ensured a systematic and reproducible approach to identifying relevant literature.Our systematic search strategy ensured we captured a wide range of studies on prophylactic and preventive migraine treatments, with a specific emphasis on osteopathic interventions alongside supplements and medications. The inclusion criteria for this review were peer-reviewed articles published in English that addressed prophylactic treatments for chronic migraines, including pharmacological, non-pharmacological, or procedural interventions. Filters and date restrictions helped focus on the most recent and relevant research from 2010 onward. Studies that exclusively focused on acute treatment or did not provide evidence-based outcomes were excluded. This structured approach ensured a comprehensive review of existing evidence on prophylactic migraine treatments and their impact on reducing MMDs.
Figure 1:
* Reports were excluded at this stage if the study did not focus on either medications/ supplements/ or non-pharmacological modalities that can be used to prevent migraine occurrences
** Reports were excluded at this stage if the reduction in monthly migraine days was not explicitly reported or if the evidence quality was deemed insufficient
Reference: Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71. doi:10.1136/bmj.n71.
Results
In our review, we included detailed information for each study, such as the population being studied, the intervention implemented, the outcomes measured, the study design, publication characteristics, quality of evidence, and the average reduction in monthly migraine days. Notably, all included articles provided a numerical value for the change in monthly migraine days, comparing the period before and after the intervention. However, it is important to highlight that several studies used the terms "migraine days" and "headache days" interchangeably, which may introduce variability in the reported outcomes.The evidence quality for each article in the chart is assessed using established research appraisal criteria frequently applied in evidence-based practice. Articles are classified into three categories: high, moderate, and low evidence quality. High-quality evidence includes randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, or meta-analyses with rigorous methodologies, adequate sample sizes, proper blinding and randomization, validated outcome measures, transparent and reproducible data, and publication in high-impact, peer-reviewed journals. Moderate-quality evidence encompasses cohort or observational studies and less robust systematic reviews, often with moderate sample sizes, limited blinding or randomization, and some methodological weaknesses, while still appearing in reputable peer-reviewed journals. Low-quality evidence involves case reports, case series, pilot studies, or poorly conducted observational studies, characterized by small sample sizes, lack of randomization or blinding, subjective outcome measures, and publication in lower-tier or non-peer-reviewed sources.Additionally, relevance to migraine prevention or treatment, disclosure of conflicts of interest, and publication recency are considered to ensure the evidence aligns with current clinical practices. These criteria provide a consistent and transparent framework for evaluating the quality of evidence included in the chart.
Data was then charted and organized first on evidence quality, then on the reduction of monthly migraine days.
Figure 2: Chart of the included studies, looking at the intervention implemented in the study, and the mean reduction of monthly migraine days based on the intervention.
Based on our review process and results, we were able to discover a wide variety of interventions implemented to decrease monthly migraine days in comparison to a placebo. Botox injections in patients with severe chronic migraines showed the greatest reduction of MMDs, with two studies reporting decreases of 10.7 and 10.6 days. Of the studies focused on onabotulinumtoxinA injections, the Phase III Research Evaluating Migraine Prophylaxis Therapy (PREEMPT) injection protocol was followed, which consists of injecting 155 U–195 U to 31–39 sites every 12-weeks.[1] The longevity between trials changed between studies, although the results of effectiveness were similar between trials and studies. However, it is important to note that in several studies, more than 10% of patients dropped out due to adverse side effects.
Erenumab, a calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) monoclonal antibody, demonstrated moderate efficacy, with reductions in MMDs ranging from 7.0 to 9.3 days. The variation in effectiveness across studies suggests that while erenumab provides a meaningful reduction in migraine burden, the response may depend on patient characteristics and baseline migraine severity. Notably, one study reported that the confidence interval for MMD reduction overlapped with zero, indicating that some patients may not experience a significant benefit. This highlights the need for individualized treatment approaches and further research to identify which subgroups may respond best to erenumab.
Rimegepant, an oral CGRP receptor antagonist, showed a more modest reduction in MMDs, with a reported decrease of 4.3 days. While this reduction is smaller than that observed with Botox and erenumab, it is still clinically meaningful, particularly for patients with episodic migraines who may not require as aggressive prophylactic treatment. Given that rimegepant is an oral medication, it may offer a more convenient alternative to injectable treatments for some patients. However, the long-term effectiveness and adherence rates of rimegepant as a preventive option warrant further investigation.
Study Design and Evidence Quality
The included studies encompassed a range of methodological approaches, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and real-world observational studies. Each study was assessed for evidence quality based on established appraisal criteria, with all included studies classified as high-quality evidence. The incorporation of systematic reviews and meta-analyses strengthens the reliability of the findings, as these studies aggregate data from multiple sources to provide a more comprehensive assessment of treatment efficacy.
One notable strength of this review is the inclusion of long-term safety and subgroup analyses, which provide valuable insights into the sustained benefits and tolerability of migraine prophylactic treatments. While RCTs remain the gold standard for evaluating treatment efficacy, real-world data from observational studies and meta-analyses of clinical practice data add an important layer of external validity, reflecting how these treatments perform outside of controlled trial settings. However, differences in study design, patient populations, and treatment protocols introduce some heterogeneity, which must be considered when interpreting the findings.
Variability in Outcome Reporting
A major limitation identified in this review is the inconsistent use of terminology across studies, particularly regarding the distinction between migraine days (MMDs) and headache days (MHDs). While MMDs specifically refer to days with migraine-level headache symptoms, MHDs encompass a broader range of headache types, including tension-type headaches and less severe headache episodes. Some studies used these terms interchangeably, complicating direct comparisons. This inconsistency highlights the need for standardized outcome reporting in migraine research to enhance clarity and comparability across studies.
Studies reporting a substantial reduction in MMDs often demonstrated statistically significant outcomes. However, placebo groups in these trials also exhibited notable reductions in MMDs, emphasizing the potential impact of placebo effects. This underscores the importance of carefully interpreting the net treatment benefit while accounting for the active placebo response in migraine prophylaxis trials. For example, in the study by. on OnabotulinumtoxinA for migraine treatment, the placebo group experienced a 6.6-day reduction in MMDs compared to an 8.4-day reduction with Botox. Due to this significant placebo effect, the overall evidence quality was rated as “moderate” rather than “high,” highlighting the challenges in isolating true treatment effects in migraine prophylaxis research.
Additionally, variability in inclusion and exclusion criteria across the reviewed studies significantly affects result comparability. The baseline number of monthly migraine days (MMDs) varied widely, with some patient populations experiencing higher initial MMDs, making reductions appear more pronounced. These differences in study design and patient selection contribute to inconsistencies in treatment outcomes and reinforce the need for standardized baseline characteristics in migraine research to facilitate more reliable cross-study comparisons.
Clinical Implications
The findings of this review reinforce the clinical utility of prophylactic migraine treatments, particularly for patients with chronic migraines who experience frequent and debilitating attacks. The substantial reduction in MMDs with onabotulinumtoxinA and erenumab suggests that these treatments may be highly beneficial for patients with a high migraine burden. However, treatment selection should consider not only efficacy but also factors such as tolerability, adherence, and patient preference. For example, Botox requires in-office injections every 12 weeks, which may be inconvenient for some patients, whereas erenumab and rimegepant offer self-administered options with different dosing schedules.
In addition to pharmacologic interventions, non-pharmacologic approaches may also play a role in migraine prevention, either as standalone options for patients seeking alternatives or as adjunct therapies to enhance treatment outcomes. Acupuncture, osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT), and exercise have shown some efficacy in reducing headache frequency and intensity, potentially providing relief with fewer side effects. Similarly, certain supplements, such as magnesium, riboflavin, and CoQ [10] have been associated with reductions in migraine frequency and may be especially appealing to patients who prefer lifestyle or dietary approaches.
Additionally, the findings highlight the importance of individualized treatment approaches, as some patients may respond better to certain interventions than others. Given the variability in response rates and the presence of adverse effects, shared decision-making between patients and healthcare providers is essential to optimize treatment outcomes. Future studies should explore biomarkers or predictive factors that can help identify which patients are most likely to benefit from specific prophylactic treatments, while also investigating the potential long-term benefits of incorporating non-pharmacologic options into comprehensive migraine management plans.
Limitations & Future Directions
While this review provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of prophylactic migraine treatments, several limitations should be acknowledged. Variability in study design, patient populations, and outcome reporting introduces challenges in directly comparing results across studies. The interchangeable use of migraine days and headache days highlights the need for greater standardization in migraine research methodologies.
Additionally, while RCTs provide high-quality evidence, real-world data on long-term adherence, effectiveness, and patient satisfaction are still limited. Future studies should focus on long-term observational studies and real-world registries to better understand treatment persistence and patient-reported outcomes. Furthermore, continued head-to-head trials comparing different prophylactic treatments will help refine clinical decision-making by directly assessing their relative efficacy, tolerability, and patient preference.
This scoping review underscores the effectiveness of onabotulinumtoxinA, erenumab, and rimegepant as prophylactic treatments for migraines, with Botox and CGRP inhibitors demonstrating the greatest reductions in MMDs. However, treatment tolerability, variability in response, and differences in outcome reporting highlight the need for an individualized approach to migraine prevention. Future research should prioritize long-term effectiveness, real-world adherence, and standardization of outcome measures to further guide evidence-based migraine management.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
I would like to offer my testimony in the support. I have received through the peer review process and support the editorial office where they are to support young authors like me, encourage them to publish their work in your esteemed journals, and globalize and share knowledge globally. I really appreciate your journal, peer review, and editorial office.
Dear Agrippa Hilda- Editorial Coordinator of Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, "The peer review process was very quick and of high quality, which can also be seen in the articles in the journal. The collaboration with the editorial office was very good."
I would like to express my sincere gratitude for the support and efficiency provided by the editorial office throughout the publication process of my article, “Delayed Vulvar Metastases from Rectal Carcinoma: A Case Report.” I greatly appreciate the assistance and guidance I received from your team, which made the entire process smooth and efficient. The peer review process was thorough and constructive, contributing to the overall quality of the final article. I am very grateful for the high level of professionalism and commitment shown by the editorial staff, and I look forward to maintaining a long-term collaboration with the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews.
To Dear Erin Aust, I would like to express my heartfelt appreciation for the opportunity to have my work published in this esteemed journal. The entire publication process was smooth and well-organized, and I am extremely satisfied with the final result. The Editorial Team demonstrated the utmost professionalism, providing prompt and insightful feedback throughout the review process. Their clear communication and constructive suggestions were invaluable in enhancing my manuscript, and their meticulous attention to detail and dedication to quality are truly commendable. Additionally, the support from the Editorial Office was exceptional. From the initial submission to the final publication, I was guided through every step of the process with great care and professionalism. The team's responsiveness and assistance made the entire experience both easy and stress-free. I am also deeply impressed by the quality and reputation of the journal. It is an honor to have my research featured in such a respected publication, and I am confident that it will make a meaningful contribution to the field.
"I am grateful for the opportunity of contributing to [International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews] and for the rigorous review process that enhances the quality of research published in your esteemed journal. I sincerely appreciate the time and effort of your team who have dedicatedly helped me in improvising changes and modifying my manuscript. The insightful comments and constructive feedback provided have been invaluable in refining and strengthening my work".
I thank the ‘Journal of Clinical Research and Reports’ for accepting this article for publication. This is a rigorously peer reviewed journal which is on all major global scientific data bases. I note the review process was prompt, thorough and professionally critical. It gave us an insight into a number of important scientific/statistical issues. The review prompted us to review the relevant literature again and look at the limitations of the study. The peer reviewers were open, clear in the instructions and the editorial team was very prompt in their communication. This journal certainly publishes quality research articles. I would recommend the journal for any future publications.
Dear Jessica Magne, with gratitude for the joint work. Fast process of receiving and processing the submitted scientific materials in “Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions”. High level of competence of the editors with clear and correct recommendations and ideas for enriching the article.
We found the peer review process quick and positive in its input. The support from the editorial officer has been very agile, always with the intention of improving the article and taking into account our subsequent corrections.
My article, titled 'No Way Out of the Smartphone Epidemic Without Considering the Insights of Brain Research,' has been republished in the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. The review process was seamless and professional, with the editors being both friendly and supportive. I am deeply grateful for their efforts.
To Dear Erin Aust – Editorial Coordinator of Journal of General Medicine and Clinical Practice! I declare that I am absolutely satisfied with your work carried out with great competence in following the manuscript during the various stages from its receipt, during the revision process to the final acceptance for publication. Thank Prof. Elvira Farina
