AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2637-8892/294
*Corresponding Author: Giulio Perrotta, Istituto per lo Studio delle Psicoterapie-ISP, Rome, Italy.
Citation: Giulio Perrotta, (2024), Perrotta Evolutionary Attachment Questionnaire” (Pea-Q1): Development, Regulation, And Validation of a Psychometric Instrument Capable of Investigating the Subjective Attachment Profile in Children (4-10 Years), Preadolescents (11-13 Years), Adolescents (14-17 Years), And Adults (18-90 Years), Psychology and Mental Health Care, 8(7): DOI:10.31579/2637-8892/294
Copyright: © 2024, Giulio Perrotta. 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: 15 July 2024 | Accepted: 31 July 2024 | Published: 06 August 2024
Keywords: attachment; attachment style; predisposing factor; facilitating factor; dysfunctional personality; psychopathology
Introduction: Unresolved childhood traumas can negatively affect an individual's psychophysical growth. Correlations between these events and the onset of psychopathologies are not yet fully known in the literature. Attachment theory attempts to explain the effects of maternal deprivation and the negative impact of traumatic events on psychophysical growth, but without succeeding in this endeavor. For this reason, a new psychometric instrument, the Perrotta Evolutionary Attachment Questionnaire (PEA-Q1), has been developed with the intent of filling this gap. Materials and Methods: A theory and model related to the topic under investigation were generated with a questionnaire (PEA-Q) to be administered to a selected population. After conducting the clinical interview and administration of the new questionnaire, the data were compared with the results of the administration of the "Separation Anxiety Test" (SAT) about the population sample with age <18 years and the "Adult Attachment Interview" (AAI) for adults to validate the proposed psychometric instrument.
Results: Statistical analysis showed that the psychometric test has a well-defined and stable construct (R=0.999; p<0.001), with the variables well represented (R=0.999; p<0.001) and positively correlated with another construct already validated (R=0.903; p<0.001).
Conclusions: PEA-Q1 is a valid, efficient and stable psychometric instrument for investigating attachment profiles in all developmental stages of the individual.
Separation Anxiety Test (SAT). Adult Attachment Interview (AAI). Clinical group (CG). Control group (Cg). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-5-TR).
Since the 1950s, Bowlby, Ainsworth and numerous researchers have studied how bonding develops between a child and his significant figures, starting with the effects of maternal deprivation. Over the decades, attachment theory has become a mainstay of current psychological science on the subject of bonding and attachment styles (Perrotta, 2024a, 2019a/b; Hazan, 1987). Attachment theory describes how early relationships, during infancy, structure the child's internal operating models of the world and himself, with the help of which he perceives events, predicts the future and constructs his plans (Santrock, 2017; Van Ijzendoorn, 1997; Bowlby, 1992/1989). Mary Ainsworth (1965/1978/1982) later succeeded in supporting Bowlby's theory with empirical data, first identifying 3 distinct patterns of attachment through a specially devised situation in the laboratory called the "Strange Situation Procedure" (Warren, 1997; Weiss, 1982; Vanghn, 1979). Later, Main and Solomon (1985/1990) introduced a fourth category, relating to children who at the time of reunification with their mother exhibited behaviors that could not be attributed to any of the three described patterns (Carlson, 1998; Fonagy, 1996; Lyons-Ruth, 1987). There are currently 4 adult "attachment styles" into which everyone falls (Perrotta, 2024a/b; Espugnatore, 2023; Shepherd, 2019; Perrotta, 2019a). The DSM 5-TR (APA, 2022), counts 2 disorders related to subjective attachment and both present inappropriate attachment modes than expected for developmental age, but symptomatically the opposite of each other (Fabiano, 2021; Atkinson, 2019; Hornor, 2019; Greenberg, 1993). Finally, there are many tests of attachment style in adults. These are often self-report instruments, whose fundamental limitation is that they measure only what one is aware of. For this reason, accurate measurement requires a broader psychodiagnostic assessment with an experienced clinician (Bartholomew, 1995/1997).
1.2. Aim
A study was conducted, with a representative population sample, to test whether the proposed questionnaire can be capable of investigating the subjective attachment profile about classical attachment theory and compare results with two other already validated questionnaires. The purpose of the present discussion is to try to determine whether, in the current state of scientific knowledge, it is possible to validate the PEA-Q1 for specific clinical purposes.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
A theory (Perrotta Evolutionary Attachment Theory, PEA-t) and model (Perrotta Evolutionary Attachment Model, PEA-m) related to the topic of subjective attachment profile were generated. From these materials, a questionnaire (PEA-Q1), with a scaled score (Perrotta Evolutionary Attachment Scale, PEA-s), was developed to administer the new psychometric instrument to a selected population for validation. Using the clinical interviews and administration of the new questionnaire, the data obtained were compared with the results of the administration of the Separation Anxiety Test (SAT) about the population sample aged <18>
2.2. Materials and methods
A theory (Perrotta Evolutive Attachment Theory, PEA-t) and its model (Perrotta Evolutive Attachment Model, PEA-m) have been developed to fill the main clinical gaps in modern attachment theory. Based on these materials, the new psychometric instrument (Perrotta Evolutive Attachment Questionnaire, PEA-Q1), in 72 items with L0-5 response, and its rating scale (Perrotta Evolutive Attachment Scale, PEA-s) was developed (Perrotta, 2024a). Two questionnaires were selected to validate the PEA-Q1, the first for the age population <18>
2.3. Setting and participants
The selected population was divided into 2 groups: the first (clinical group, CG); and the second (control group, Cg). Inclusive criteria for CG are: 1) Age 4-90 years old; 2) Italian nationality or citizenship for at least 2 generations; and 3) narrative of one or more unresolved youthful traumatic experiences (occurring by the time they reached the age of majority, 18 years old). Exclusive criteria for CG are: 1) Age < 4> 90 years old; 2) foreign nationality or Italian nationality for less than 2 generations; 3) Absence of unresolved youth traumatic experiences. Those excluded were automatically included in the Cg. The population size of the CG is 1644 (M: 37.4, SD: 23.3). All individuals with the same characteristics but with the absence of youthful traumatic experiences, regardless of their resolution, were included in the Cg, for a combined total of 3288 units. [Table 1]
| Age | Male (%) | Female (%) | Total | M ± SD |
| 4-10 | 59 (8.3%) | 77 (8.3%) | 136 (8.3%) | 7.1 ± 2.0 |
| 11-13 | 81 (11.3%) | 99 (10.8%) | 180 (10.9%) | 12.0 ± 0.7 |
| 14-18 | 90 (12.3%) | 119 (12.9%) | 209 (12.7%) | 15.8 ± 1.3 |
| 19-28 | 75 (10.4%) | 99 (10.7%) | 174 (10.6%) | 22.3 ± 2.8 |
| 29-38 | 78 (10.8%) | 102 (11.0%) | 180 (10.9%) | 32.7 ± 2.7 |
| 39-48 | 83 (11.6%) | 103 (11.1%) | 186 (11.3%) | 42.9 ± 2.5 |
| 49-58 | 92 (12.8%) | 110 (11.9%) | 202 (12.3%) | 53.2 ± 2.6 |
| 59-68 | 86 (11.9%) | 104 (11.3%) | 190 (11.6%) | 63.6 ± 2.4 |
| 69-78 | 43 (6.0%) | 60 (6.5%) | 103 (6.3%) | 72.7 ± 2.5 |
| 79-90 | 33 (4.6%) | 51 (5.5%) | 84 (5.1%) | 85.1 ± 2.3 |
| Total | 720 (43.8%) | 924 (56.2%) | 1644 (100.0%) | 37.4 ± 23.3 |
Table 1: Population sample (numerousness – CG)
Taking into account the 2020-2022 pandemic period and the different geographical residences of the patients, it was preferred to carry out the clinical interview and administration of the questionnaires via the online video calling platforms Skype and WhatsApp. This research work was conducted from March 2019 to June 2024. As per the informed consent and data processing, all participants were guaranteed anonymity, and compliance with the ethical requirements of the Declaration of Helsinki. For participating units under the age of 18, explicit parental consent was requested. It was not necessary to request an opinion from the local Ethics Committee as the patients come from a private catchment area and the data are retrospective. The research is unfunded and free from conflicts of interest. The dropout rate was 0/3288 (0.0%).
Having completed the procedures for selecting the population sample, divided into two groups with equal characteristics for age and sexual gender, we first proceeded to the clinical interview if not already carried out for other studies (being subjects already known to the interviewer) and then to the administration of the 3 questionnaires (PEA-Q1, SAT and AAT), to obtain the data to carry out the statistical analysis related to the descriptive of the variables and their frequency, and the comparison of the averages, transforming the investigated variables to nonparametric, using IBM SPSS software, version 27, for T-test analysis for independent data that the Chi-square or χ²). The results of the SAT and AAT were adapted by definition to the results of the PEA-Q1 based on classical attachment theory to make comparisons. In the CG, age does not correlate with PEA-Q1 (p=0.465) and there are no significant differences among the 3 variables investigated (Table 2), in that the search outcomes are identical (1644/1644, 100%). In the Cg, age does not correlate with PEA-Q1 (p=0.489) but there are significant differences among the 3 variables investigated (Tables 3-4), as several data points differ (539/1644, 32.8%).
N |
Type_variable (attachment style) |
n (%) |
p | |
1 |
PEA-Q1 | 1 (Secure) 2 (Ambivalente) 3 (Avoidant) 4 (Disorganized) | 46 (2.8%) 351 (21.4%) 937 (57%) 310 (18.9%) |
1.000 |
2 |
SAT | 1 (Secure) 2 (Ambivalente) 3 (Avoidant) 4 (Disorganized) | 43 (8.7%) 104 (21.1%) 262 (53.3%) 83 (18.9%) |
1.000 |
3 |
AAT | 1 (Secure) 2 (Ambivalente) 3 (Avoidant) 4 (Disorganized) | 3 (0.3%) 247 (21.4%) 675 (58.6%) 227 (19.7%) |
1.000 |
Table 2: Statistical analysis (CG): Frequencies and correlations. p: significance.
N |
Type_variable (attachment style) |
n (%) | |
1 |
PEA-Q1 | 1 (Secure) 2 (Ambivalente) 3 (Avoidant) 4 (Disorganized) | 1030 (62.7%) 562 (34.2%) 52 (3.2%) 0 (0.0%) |
2 |
SAT | 1 (Secure) 2 (Ambivalente) 3 (Avoidant) 4 (Disorganized) | 466 (94.7%) 24 (4.9%) 2 (0.4%) 0 (0.0%) |
3 |
AAT | 1 (Secure) 2 (Ambivalente) 3 (Avoidant) 4 (Disorganized) | 1105 (95.9%) 39 (3.4%) 8 (0.7%) 0 (0.0%) |
Table 3: Statistical analysis (Cg): Frequencies.
Questionnaire
|
SAT |
AAT |
| R (p) | R (p) | |
PEA-Q1 |
0.307 (<0>) |
0.293 (<0>) |
Table 4: Statistical analysis (Cg): Correlations. R: Pearson's correlation, p: significance.
A binary correlation analysis was conducted between the first administration of PEA-Q1 and the second administration after 1 month to check the stability of the test, obtaining a Pearson coefficient (R) of 0.999, with p=<0>Figure 1)
Figure 1. ANOVA test for paired data (PEA-Q1_score_I / PEA-Q1_score_II)
The high specificity of the proposed new questionnaire, in light of the results obtained from the statistical analysis of the research data, suggests that the PEA-Q1 can perform the investigation of the subjective attachment profile as the 2 questionnaires used for comparisons do, but adding correctives. Specifically, in the CG it emerges that the data are essentially identical, demonstrating that in the presence of specific clinical symptoms, the PEA-Q1 can identify and classify them according to the 4 classical attachment styles but using a diagnostic language: in fact, the new questionnaire does not use the classical styles but identifies them in the 4 clinical styles (secure-sane, avoidant-neurotic, ambivalent-dramatic, and disorganized-fragmented), thus bringing the symptomatology back according to a more clinical perspective. The lack of differences between the outcomes in the 3 questionnaires indicates that in the clinical population, all questionaries are well aligned, efficient, and effective in capturing the attachment style of belonging (p=1,000). In the Cg, however, significant differences emerge that are the product of structural and functional differences among the 3 questionnaires. In fact: the first comparison was between the outcomes of the PEA-Q1 about the population under the age of 18 and the SAT, precisely because this questionnaire is calibrated only for that type of population; the second comparison was between the outcomes of the PEA-Q1 about the population under the age of 18 and older and the AAT, precisely because this questionnaire is calibrated only for that type of population. In the first case, the results differed by 32.1% (158/492), while in the second case, the results differed by 36.9% (425/1152). These values can be attributed precisely to the specific characteristics of the PEA-Q1, which, in addition to being able to investigate the subjective attachment profile according to the classical model (secure, avoidant, ambivalent and disorganized) but with the clinical meaning (secure-sound, neurotic, dramatic and fragmented, according to the Perrotta Integrative Clinical Interviews, PICI-3), it is also able to identify according to the correspondent model (PEA-s) the structural elements (emotional stability, bonding strength, capacity to love and trust in the future) and the functional elements (secure-insecure and organized-disorganized), and related 16 sub-styles. Specifically, again in the Cg, the PEA-Q1 was able to redefine the subjective attachment profile of 205/1644 (12.5%) by identifying dysfunctional and/or pathological features in the absence of self-reported symptoms or elevations in the other 2 questionnaires. The subsequent clinical interview then confirmed the findings from the participants themselves. Administration of the PEA-Q1 after 1 month also produced the same data, confirming its stability over time. In light of the results obtained, the PEA-Q1 is a candidate as an optimal tool for use during psychotherapies, helping the therapist in the exact clinical framing of the patient.
This research work has some limitations in the study design that may partly influence the results. In particular, the structure of the PEA-Q1 is substantially different from the other 2 questionnaires, which only trace the outcome of the test back to one of the 4 classical attachment styles; instead, the PEA-Q1 starts from the clinical assumption of the symptomatological manifestation to reconstruct the structural and functional framework. For this reason, comparisons were only possible by equalizing the results of the 2 selected questionnaires with the outcome of the PEA-Q1, precisely to best ensure as objective an analytical response as possible. However, the size of the population sample selected and the outcome obtained are elements that can reinforce the results.
Perrotta Evolutive Attachment Questionnaire (PEA-Q1) is a valid, efficient and stable psychometric instrument for investigating attachment profiles in all developmental stages of the individual, being able to comprehensively investigate the subjective attachment profile, and its structural and functional components, to facilitate better clinical framing during psychotherapy.
This work received no external funding.
All participants were assured of compliance with the ethical requirements of the Charter of Human Rights, the Declaration of Helsinki in its most up-to-date version, the Oviedo Convention, the guidelines of the National Bioethics Committee, the standards of "Good Clinical Practice" (GCP) in the most recent version, the national and international codes of ethics of reference, as well as the fundamental principles of state law and international laws according to the updated guidelines on observation studies and clinical trial studies. According to Legislative Decree No. 52/2019 and Law No. 3/2018, this research does not require the prior opinion of an Ethics Committee in the implementation of Regulation (EU) no. 536/2014. In compliance with Regulation (EU) 2017/745, the Declaration of Helsinki, and the Oviedo Convention, the scientific research contained in the manuscript: (a) does not involve new or already on-the-market drugs or medical devices; (b) does not involve the administration of a new or already on-the-market drug or medical device; (c) is not for commercial purposes; (d) is not sponsored or funded; (e) the participants have signed the informed consent and data processing, in compliance with applicable national and EU regulations (f) refers to non-interventional but observational-comparative diagnostic topics, for validation of the newly proposed questionnaire; (g) the population sample was collected at a date before the start of this study and is part of a private, non-public database. I remain at your disposal.
Subjects who gave regular informed consent agreements were recruited; moreover, these subjects requested and obtained from GP, as the sole examiner and project manager, not to meet the other study collaborators, thus remaining completely anonymous.
The subjects who participated in the study requested and obtained that GP be the sole examiner during the therapeutic sessions and that all other authors be aware of the participant's data in an exclusively anonymous form.
The author declares no conflicts of interest.
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.
