reworked instructions to authors on kinds of Clinical Papers that would be considered for publication: of course after appropriate peer review. eCAM will give serious consideration to peer review the following kinds of clinical papers: 1. Brief Case Reports: The brief case reports describe, in 600 words, a single interesting case. The main criterion for selection of a case is that it should address a signif- icant question in the CAM community or enable readers to learn something. Case reports can be but do not have to be reports of rare conditions. They can report unusual presentations of more common conditions, challenging differential diagnoses, mistaken diagnoses, novel or uncommon methods of treatment or unexpected out- comes. Preferably the case should have a good illustra- tion. Consent for publication in print and electronically must be obtained from the patient or, if this is not pos- sible, the next of kin. (See Patients’ consent and permis- sion to publish). 2. Developed case reports with detailed, illustrative docu- mentation: These detailed case reports are from 1500 to 2000 words. They may be longer, up to 5000 words, if a series of cases is reported or if there is a demonstrable need for a long introduction to review the literature. These reports should be accompanied by illustrative figures. eCAM’s preference is for brief case reports and the longer ones will go through a strict review by the eCAM 2009;6(3) 281 editorial office before deemed worthy to enter the review system. 3. Case reports expanded into hypotheses: These case reports are from 1500 to 2000 words or up to 5000 words if describing a series of cases. The case or cases should be strictly analyzed and a hypothesis developed. 4. Clinical studies with as strong an evidence base as possible: Clinical studies should be submitted in the form of Original Articles. Authors should note that the journal place importance on evidence. It is preferred that randomized–controled studies with double-blinded proce- dures are performed. If the nature of the study does not allow such study design, authors should give thorough explanation as to why this is not possible, and how they have handled the problem to minimize bias. References 1. Goldrosen MH, Straus SE. Complementary and alternative medicine: assessing the evidence for immunological benefits. Nat Rev Immunol 2004;4:912–21. 2. Cooper EL. CAM, eCAM, bioprospecting: The 21st century pyramid. eCAM 2005;2:125–7. 3. Ma S-X. Neurobiology of acupuncture. eCAM 2004;1:41–7. 4. Lee J-D, Park H-J, Chae Y, Lim S. An overview of bee venom acupuncture in the treatment of arthritis. eCAM 2005;2:79–84. 5. Lewith GT, White PJ, Pariente J. Investigating acupuncture using brain imaging techniques: the current state of play. eCAM 2005;2:315–19. 6. Tsao JCI, Zeltzer LK. Complementary and alternative medicine approaches for pediatric pain: a review of the state-of-the-science. eCAM 2005;2:149–59.