In the classic Hippocratic tradition, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment are all inextricably linked to one goal: to improve the patient's health. And, while scientific progress sometimes necessitates that researchers concentrate their efforts on one of the three components of this triad, they should always collaborate to integrate their efforts into guidelines and practises that serve that key target. This should alert investigators to seize any opportunity to anticipate this link in their research.

This may seem self-evident, but there are far too many examples of highly sophisticated treatments being developed without an appropriate protocol to pre-select the appropriate patient subgroups, and - far more - of advanced diagnostic technologies yielding detailed biomedical data but no clear perspectives for better treatment. Furthermore, the effect of testing on patient outcomes was not related to additional interventions or diagnostic accuracy of tests. The clinical significance of randomised trials may also be less robust than reporting of statistically significant results suggests, unless the number of events is also considered, as Walsh and his colleagues demonstrate. They used their newly developed 'Fragility Index' to analyse how many events made the difference between a significant and non-significant result in a review of RCTs reporting such results in high-impact medical journals. As evidenced by the fact that significant results in many RCTs are dependent on a small number of events, inclusion and exclusion criteria should be transparent and well-justified. John and his colleagues investigated the reporting and justification of exclusion criteria, as well as the extent to which exclusion criteria affected the generalizability of study results, in a systematic review of trials on secondary prevention of cardiovascular events.

Although almost all trials reported the exclusion criteria used, only one of the 113 articles justified them.While there was no evidence that generalizability was harmed, the authors recommend that the reasons for using exclusion criteria be better reported.In addition, the inclusion of studies in systematic reviews is not always justified. Because problems with internal and external validity can never be ruled out, authors should always consider known and potential limitations of their work in the discussion sections of research papers. According to Ioannidis' work, basic science articles may perform worse than clinical research reports when the discussion sections of these two types of papers published in leading rheumatology journals are compared.They discovered a significant difference and make recommendations to encourage self-criticism, particularly in basic science articles.Patient-reported outcome measurement instruments have been recognised as critical endpoints in clinical research for decades.

Unlike most other instruments, the Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) begins with the preferences and priorities of individual patients rather than a predetermined generic or specific health-related content.Based on data from a large number of physical therapy patients. Understanding the minimal clinically important improvement (MCII) is critical when evaluating patient reported outcome measurement instruments.They conclude that variation in MCII by baseline value is due to floor and ceiling effects rather than patient expectations.

One of the main goals in dealing with non-response in clinical epidemiological studies is to protect external validity by avoiding selective recruitment. Using data from a prospective cohort study of diabetes patients, we evaluated substitution sampling as an alternative to more traditional recruitment strategies such as sending reminders.

“Journal of Chromatography and Separation Techniques: Open Access” has assembled renowned scientists together in the Editorial board in order to ensure quality and originality in the manuscripts.

The Journal publishes Original research, Review articles, Case reports, Short communications, Mini reviews, Book reviews, etc., aimed at encapsulating the latest knowledge that synthesizes new theories and methodologies and also explores the leading-edge technology used in various research methodologies.

Thanks and Regards,

Martin Joy

Journal of Chromatography and Separation Techniques