Abstract

This article constitutes a conceptual and methodological approach to an articulated process of the clinic with science, in the field of health, integration and close links between the practice of clinical practice in the daily life of the profession and scientific research aimed at one of the processes of training by competencies and a fundamental pillar in the research culture of the UPAL institution for the benefit of students and teachers of the dentistry career, strengthening research by giving the relevant importance to the description of the report of clinical cases that, within the path to be taken in scientific production, one of the steps to follow is the analysis of the format of the structure of the description of clinical cases, based on its constituent elements at a level of familiarization and reproduction in a scientific article, some outlines of its content, which induce to generate results of the clinical tests obtained, providing the importance of recording everything observed and relevant data obtained in the clinical history.

Keywords

Clinical case reports, Scientific research, Competency-based training, Research culture

Abbreviations

SRP: Scientific Research Process; CARE: Case Report Guidelines; EBD: Evidence based dentistry (EBD).

Introduction

The "Why" of scientific research (the problem) is of paramount importance. As the first characteristic of the Scientific Research Process (SRP), the problem (the "why") of the research is defined as the component of the research process that specifies the situation of a part of objective reality, which creates a need in a subject. This subject will then develop a process, an activity, to transform the aforementioned situation and solve the problem. According to Carlos Alvarez de Zayas¹, the scientific problem manifests itself externally in reality, but it is precisely a consequence of the lack of knowledge about elements and relationships that exist within it. The formulation of the scientific problem is the expression of the limits of current scientific knowledge about a part of reality, which generates dissatisfaction in the subject: the need to develop the research.

From the early years of entering dental school or various healthcare programs, students often wonder at what stage or level they will be capable of addressing clinical aspects, understanding a patient's signs and symptoms, and investigating their underlying causes. This process becomes particularly evident when facing the first resolved clinical case, which establishes clinical parameters and marks the beginning of solving odonto-stomatological problems. As their training progresses, clinical cases become increasingly complex until they reach professional life. For this reason, clinical activities and practices, competitions, and congresses on clinical case reports are constant in the healthcare world; in reality, progress within the profession involves facing ever-greater challenges, which must be overcome as the student grows and develops as a professional.

Scientific research and the publication of clinical cases are closely related activities, a path to entering the scientific world. Their sole aim is to communicate the results through clinical case reports, which often contain novel information that, in the future, forms the basis of research studies with a higher level of scientific evidence. Every clinical case report is a source of scientific or educational knowledge, serving as a means to share experiences in clinical treatments between professionals and those in the learning process. The description of a clinical case is the first step in clinical research. To describe an optimal clinical case, you must know and practice three basic principles: precision, clarity, and brevity, applying known responses to new situations and treatments for recurring pathologies and new rehabilitation approaches.

According to McKerrow (2005), most people have heard this question: If a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it, does it make a sound? The correct answer is “no.” Sound is more than just “pressure waves” and, in reality, there can be no sound without a listener; similarly, scientific output is a signal of any kind of clinical practice that, until it is perceived, that is, until a scientific article is published, is useless if it is not received and understood by the reader or public to whom it is addressed.

Description of a Clinical Case Report

A document containing a detailed clinical description of a patient receiving dental care and comprehensive rehabilitation should be disseminated at scientific events. These events foster clarification, discussion, and, above all, the advancement of contributions from a specialist, scientific, and investigative perspective regarding the pathophysiology of a rare or uncommon disease. The description is systematic, also addressing complications arising from treatment. The results are often different from what is expected in routine clinical practice; these infrequent cases represent a valuable source for understanding variations in the signs and symptoms of clinical cases. Science is at stake; what should be done with it? It must be rigorously and responsibly preserved. It is mentioned that behind every study there are components, including regulations, authorizations, and informed consent, that protect participants and ensure confidence in the methodology and transmission of results.

The research process for scientific production, among several format reviews, includes the internationally recognized and recommended CARE (Case Report Guidelines) format, which facilitates the proper structuring of clinical reports. This is achieved through an analysis of the clinical case description format, based on its constituent elements and an explanatory method. This method characterizes the summary, introduction, and clinical findings for their corresponding determination and formulation, prioritizing the content of the description. Similarly, clinical findings, types of studies, and presumptive and definitive diagnoses are defined based on their constituent elements. This streamlines the operationalization of the description, leading to an analysis of therapeutic interventions, their types, and application, with the necessary and sufficient elements. This complements the in-depth content, evaluation, and evolution of the treated pathology over a specific period.

Therefore, to ensure a clinical intervention for research purposes and evidence-based dentistry (EBD), ethical procedures are suggested both in the intervention and in the production of the clinical case report.

Discussion

Based on the importance of research in the preparation of clinical case report descriptions, this stage represents a period of clinical anecdotes and the awakening of brilliant ideas by students. It is directed toward a valuable contribution to scientific production at UPAL, which establishes a new systematic, rigorous, and bioethical process rooted in transforming the capacity for observation by uncovering dental scientific evidence.

When proposals are formulated to establish necessary criteria, they allow for the timely identification of certain pathologies, preventing errors in the diagnostic approach. Scientific research provides a logical structure that goes beyond a narrative of the patient’s clinical history. This task requires identifying factors and collecting novel findings, signs, and symptoms without setting aside the clinical experience of the dental professional, who issues value judgments based on their clinical skills and the knowledge acquired through practice.

The importance of documenting the interesting clinical cases presented by patients attending the clinic is a process driven by a research culture. This serves as a unique pathway in the construction of new knowledge and, above all, in the formulation of questions that can generate other types of studies with a broader scope.^2-4

Conclusion

Given the importance of research in developing clinical case reports, this stage, which involves sharing clinical anecdotes and sparking brilliant ideas among students, leads to a valuable contribution to scientific production at UPAL. This contribution establishes a new systematic, rigorous, and bioethical process focused on transforming observational skills by identifying scientific evidence in dentistry. Formulating proposals deemed necessary to establish criteria allows for the timely identification of certain pathologies, preventing errors in the diagnostic approach.

References

1. Álvarez de Zayas CM. Methodology of scientific research. 9th ed. Kipus Publishing Group; 2018. 
2. Arias Rojas A. Diagnosis in Dentistry: From Theory to Clinical Practice. Universidad del Valle, Editorial Program; 2008.
3. Hernández-Sampieri R, Fernández-Collado C, Baptista-Lucio MP. Research methodology. 6th ed. McGraw-Hill Education; 2014. 
4. Marroquín-Soto C, Padilla-Avalos CA, Hernández Sampieri R. Methodological foundations for clinical research in stomatology. Heredian Stomatol J. 2023;33(1):56-61.