In 2024, many authors bring new findings, practical information on the diagnosis and treatment of conditions related to thoracic disease to our journal. Their articles published with us have received very well feedback in the field and stimulate a lot of discussions and new insights among the peers.

Hereby, we would like to highlight some of our outstanding authors who have been making immense efforts in their research fields, with a brief interview of their unique perspectives and insightful views as authors.

Outstanding Authors (2024)

Ryaan El-Andari, The University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada

Gengyi Zou, MD Anderson Cancer Center, USA

Brian Mitzman, University of Utah, USA

Keisei Tachibana, Kyorin University, Japan

David C. Rotzinger, University of Lausanne, Switzerland

Anthony Yii, Changi General Hospital, Singapore

Takashi Makino, Tokyo Rosai Hospital, Japan

Cristian Deana, Academic Hospital of Udine, Italy 

João Paulo Cassiano de Macedo, University of Sao Paulo, Brazil

Thisarana Wijayaratne, The University of Bristol, UK

Dina Christa Janse van Rensburg, The University of Pretoria, South Africa

Mary Katherine Kimbrough, The University of Arkansas, USA

Jae Kwang Yun, Ulsan University College, Korea

Stefan B. Watzka, Clinic Floridsdorf, Austria

Alberto Fantin, University Hospital of Udine, Italy

Oliver S. Chow, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, USA

Megan E. Campany, The University of North Carolina, USA

Yohei Kawaguchi, Tokyo Medical University, Japan

Whitney S. Brandt, Washington University in Saint Louis, USA

Herbert Kwok Wang Chun, The University of Hong Kong, China

Outstanding Author

Ryaan El-Andari

Ryaan El-Andari obtained his MD in 2022 from the University of Alberta and is currently a second-year cardiac surgery resident at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. He plans to start a Ph.D. in experimental surgery in the summer of 2024 with Dr. Jayan Nagendran on a project seeking to refine and improve ex-situ lung perfusion technologies. He has worked closely with Dr. Jayan Nagendran on numerous projects including investigations into outcomes following heart valve surgery, coronary artery revascularization, and tissue engineering heart valve replacement options. Most recently, Dr. El-Andari and Dr. Nagendran have been investigating the impact of resource allocation on surgical practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. They hope to identify trends in how resources were allocated during the pandemic, and how this impacted patients waiting for surgery and hope to identify optimal strategies for future resource allocation during times of resource restrictions.

Dr. El-Andari thinks that the following things are the elements a good academic paper should include. First and foremost, it must have a good question, which is key in ensuring that an academic paper is impactful and important. With a good question, a researcher can build an excellent paper that can provide valuable information and may even result in a significant impact on the literature and practice. Strong data is essential in answering the proposed question and providing accurate results. Planning ahead to determine required sample sizes will help to organize a project and anticipate the time and resources required to collect robust data. Finally, the writing of the manuscript requires considerable time and effort. A good academic paper often tells a story. Structuring the introduction to provide background into what is known about the field, what questions are unanswered, and how the manuscript being written will look to address the problem helps to engage the reader and increases the chances they will retain what they have read. The methods should be clear and concise while providing enough details that the project could be feasibly replicated by the reader. The discussion should then summarize the findings, put them into the context of the previous literature, and should review the key takeaway points as well as the future directions of the field. Combining all of the above results in a strong and impactful paper.

According to Dr. El-Andari, planning is the key step for preparing a paper. From the initial development of the research question, planning ahead for the conduct of the investigation or experimental design keeping in mind the question will help to ensure the result answers the initial question. Organization is paramount, especially when analyzing data. Having a systematic approach to analyzing and interpreting data will help to keep the project organized and on track.

“Perseverance is necessary in research. Research requires a significant dedication of time and effort. The process can be long and arduous, and the reward of a completed and published manuscript is often delayed. The process can be discouraging with setbacks expected as part of the research process. I encourage other scientists and researchers to persist in the face of challenges, and to consistently consider the broader context while focusing on individual tasks. Continuing to work towards the overall goal of the research project and taking small steps in the right direction will eventually get the project to the finish line. The importance of research cannot be understated, and additions to the literature help us advance our understanding of the world. In medicine and surgery, we are especially fortunate as researchers, as our contributions to the literature help to improve the care of patients. When we publish impactful works that influence patient care, we can improve the lives of many more people than we would have otherwise been able to on our own working in a clinical setting. Patient care should be a driving force in medical research and I hope that goal will help to motivate others, helping them persevere in their research ventures,” says Dr. Dr. El-Andari.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Gengyi Zou

Gengyi Zou is a Postdoc Fellow at the Department of GI Medical Oncology of MD Anderson Cancer Center. As an oncology scientist, cancer biology has been the primary focus of her entire research career. She has immersed herself in gastric cancer research, establishing a groundbreaking gastric organoid model to mimic gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) tumorigenesis. Simultaneously, she contributed to research on mammary tumorigenesis, liver disease signaling, and esophageal neoplasia genetics, co-authoring several manuscripts. In the long run, she aims to decipher the underlying biology of advanced GAC tumorigenesis. This deeper understanding will inform advanced GAC patient stratification and facilitate the development of effective therapeutic strategies, which will contribute greatly to gastric cancer patients in America and worldwide.

From Dr. Zou’s perspective, a good academic paper needs to be authentic and innovative. In constructing a paper, authors should ensure their story flows smoothly and is easy for readers to follow along. To her, sharing published resources is crucial for collaborative science, too. “Let's stay open-minded and support each other in advancing from bench to bedside,” adds she.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

Brian Mitzman

Dr. Brian Mitzman is an Assistant Professor in the Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery at the University of Utah and Huntsman Cancer Institute, focusing on non-cardiac General Thoracic Surgery. His clinical interests concentrate on Thoracic Surgical Oncology, specifically the application of robotics for complex tumors. He serves as the Director of Robotic Thoracic Surgery and chairs the University Robotic Steering Committee. As a Huntsman Cancer Institute Investigator, Dr. Mitzman’s research interests focus on clinical outcomes and optimizing treatment approaches for lung and esophageal cancer. He has specific expertise in cost-effectiveness and determining the appropriate balance of cost and innovation in surgical technology. He currently serves as a Senior Editor for the Annals of Thoracic Surgery and an editorial board member for the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. Learn more about him here.

From Dr. Mitzman’s perspective, a strong academic paper provides a meaningful conclusion, even if it is with a negative outcome. It leads to a real impact on how physicians treat patients or on the overall understanding of a disease process. To achieve this, authors must start with a hypothesis that can be answered with the data being evaluated. Limitations of the data must be understood just as well as the question being asked, and conclusions must be tempered and based on what the data show instead of an author’s preconceived assumptions.

Dr. Mitzman adds that academic writing allows surgeons to impact more than just their local patients. A well-done project can influence how physicians around the world treat patients and directly change care pathways at an international level.

“All authors come with biases, and we must make a conscious effort to evaluate the data and our hypotheses for what they are. Often, we have such personal investment in our work that becomes hard to see the flaws with a manuscript and trust peer review as actual constructive criticism. Finally, staying up to date with a field such as lung cancer can be a struggle, as a treatment paradigm may change prior to completion of a novel project,” says Dr. Mitzman.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

Keisei Tachibana

Keisei Tachibana is an associate professor at the Department of Thoracic and Thyroid Surgery, Kyorin University, Tokyo, Japan. He graduated from the Kyorin University School of Medicine in 1999 and obtained a PhD degree from the same University in 2011. From 2005 to 2007, he served as a resident in the Division of Thoracic Surgery, Shizuoka Cancer Center, Shizuoka, Japan. In 2009, he conducted research on multistage carcinogenesis of lung adenocarcinoma in the Department of Diagnostic Pathology at Tsukuba University, Ibaraki, Japan. His research fields are minimally invasive surgery such as thoracoscopic surgery and robotic-assisted thoracoscopic surgery, bronchial intervention, metastatic pulmonary tumor, lung pathology and cytology.

Dr. Tachibana thinks the most important thing to do, in academic writing, is to go with the trend of science which advances rapidly, and always collect new information. Further, he states it is crucial to pursue daily clinical questions, participate in academic conferences positively and read the latest research papers to keep one’s knowledge current.

From Dr. Tachibana’s perspective, having his research results cited in other papers and sharing and discussing information with other researchers in daily clinical practice and at academic conferences are important for ensuring his writing is critical.

Lastly, Dr. Tachibana shares a few words to encourage other academic writers, “We doctors spend our days busy with clinical work, research, and education. I feel that it is important to diligently pursue academic writing even if it takes time.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

David C. Rotzinger

David C. Rotzinger, MD, PhD, is a cardiothoracic and vascular radiologist at Lausanne University Hospital (CHUV) and the University of Lausanne (UNIL). He received his MD in 2017 and a PhD in life sciences at the UNIL in 2021. He serves as an attending physician in the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology - Cardiothoracic and Vascular Division at CHUV and has been the head thereof since 2022. Since 2023, he has been a senior lecturer with teaching authorization "PD-MER". His main research areas are evaluating and optimizing image quality and diagnostic performance in computed tomography (CT), including the more recent dual-energy (DECT) and photon-counting (PCCT) systems. His research projects include the assessment of novel non-invasive atherosclerotic inflammation markers derived from post-mortem CT studies. He is also a committee member of the Swiss Medical Board of Radiology. Learn more about Dr. Rotzinger here, and connect with him on LinkedIn.

Dr. Rotzinger regards a paper that tackles a timely subject that needs either a deeper understanding or a clarified decision-making process as a good academic paper. He points out that the methodology should be replicable by other study groups and described in a structured way so that readers not only understand the involved scientific process but ideally should enjoy the read. A catchy title helps gather the potential reader’s attention. He adds, “Needless to say, it is not always possible to conduct large international, multicentric randomized controlled trials to address each and every scientific question we stumble upon during our medical career, however, the authors should do their very best to deliver a high-impact assessment of the hypothesis that is being tested.”

Academic papers are often authored not by one but by several individuals. In Dr. Rotzinger’s view, authors often face numerous challenges when attempting to write and publish a manuscript. Constructing a clear and coherent narrative that relies on facts and logical thinking can be daunting, requiring skills that are gathered over years of experience and feedback from co-authors, senior researchers, reviewers, and editors. Throughout this process, sustaining motivation can be difficult, finding time to write amidst busy schedules is a constant struggle, and co-authors may not always be available when their input is needed. Editing a draft for submission to a particular journal entails employing a general academic style and tone, often necessitating adherence to very specific author guidelines, which can be a time-consuming labor. However, he indicates that some publishers are making strides to accommodate researchers in this regard by allowing flexibility in manuscript structure and style.

“In many ways, writing a manuscript is one of the most exciting parts of research. However, it can also be a challenging phase for junior authors who may struggle to grasp the key issues, lose confidence, or feel demotivated, leading them to give up. The excitement lies in not just presenting scientific results but also putting them in perspective by considering what is already known and what questions remain unanswered. Overall, the blend of contributing to knowledge, critical thinking, and collaborating globally with the aim of making a real-world impact is what makes academic writing fascinating,” says Dr. Rotzinger.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

Anthony Yii

Dr. Anthony Yii is a Consultant in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine at Changi General Hospital in Singapore and a Clinical Assistant Professor at Duke-National University of Singapore Graduate Medical School. He also serves as a Clinical Instructor and Content Expert at the Lee Kong Chian School of Medicine. He earned his medical degree from the University of Cambridge and obtained specialist accreditation in Respiratory Medicine in 2017. His research focuses on Airway Diseases such as asthma and COPD, particularly pheno-endotyping, risk stratification, and population health aspects. Recent projects include investigating blood eosinophil count as a biomarker for guiding systemic corticosteroid treatment in hospitalized asthma exacerbations and developing an artificial intelligence model for teaching and evaluating inhaler technique. Dr. Yii is recognized for his outstanding contributions, receiving accolades such as the Singhealth Publish! Award and the National COVID-19 Award.

In Dr. Yii’s opinion, when preparing a paper, authors must maintain faith in their work's significance and uphold high standards of scientific integrity. They should ensure their research addresses important issues and utilize appropriate analytic approaches, with appropriate control for confounders and ensuring valid inferences are made based on the data. He thinks it is essential that study participants represent real-world target populations with complex comorbidities and may experience barriers to healthcare, reflecting real-world complexity.

“I chose to publish in the Journal of Thoracic Diseases due to its inclusive nature, in that it welcomes studies from various countries and cultures. This inclusivity ensures a global perspective, enriching the discourse on thoracic diseases with diverse insights and experiences. The journal's commitment to publishing research from different regions fosters collaboration and understanding across borders, promoting the exchange of ideas and methodologies,” says Dr. Yii.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

Takashi Makino

Takashi Makino, MD, PhD, is the Deputy Director of the Department of Respiratory Surgery at Tokyo Rosai Hospital, Japan. He earned his MD and PhD degrees from Toho University, Tokyo, Japan. He was a resident in the Division of Thoracic Oncology at the National Cancer Center Hospital in Tokyo from 2009-2013 and worked in the Division of Chest Surgery at Toho University School of Medicine in Tokyo from 2013-2019. His research areas include minimally invasive thoracic surgery, surgical pathology, and work-life balance support.

A difficult aspect of academic writing, in Dr. Makino’s opinion, is logically considering the difference between the result and prediction. It is challenging to eliminate personal assumptions and examine the results scientifically without interpreting personal convenience.

Academic writing often involves evidence synthesis. To select the appropriate evidence for synthesis and analysis, Dr. Makino would review the history of previous studies. Particularly, he would read through the papers used in the Introduction and determine whether they are reliable. He would also comprehensively search and verify papers and incorporate the opinions and ideas of researchers, including those in other fields, through academic conferences and research meetings. He believes academic writers should be cautious about any potential bias while selecting evidence.

In addition, disclosing the conflict of interest (COI) is important, too, from Dr. Makino’s perspective. Involvement with companies and other entities that have assumed COI can affect research methods and results to the detriment of the patients and society.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

Cristian Deana

Cristian Deana obtained his Medical School Degree in 2010 and completed his residency in Anesthesia, Analgesia, Resuscitation, Critical Care and Pain Therapy in 2016. Both were carried out at the University of Udine under the guidance of Professor Giorgio Della Rocca (Full Professor), where he gained expertise in the hemodynamic management of high-risk patients in non-cardiac surgery as well as the critical care setting. Since 2016, he has been working at the Anesthesia and Intensive Care 1 Unit in the Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care of the Academic Hospital of Udine – a tertiary-level Hub Hospital providing 1095 beds, where all surgical specialties are carried out. His specific fields of interests and research are ultrasound in ICU, nutrition in critically ill patients, neuro-intensive care and the perioperative care of high-risk non-cardiac surgical patients, especially the ones undergoing esophagectomy. Learn more about Dr. Deana on ResearchGate and Orcid, and connect with him on X @DeanaCristian85.

From Dr. Deana’s perspective, authors should be enthusiastic and curious to dedicate passion and time to research. To avoid biases in one’s writing, he believes native authors should be supervised by expert authors for the first time they construct a paper.

“I strongly believe that the only way to deliver the best treatment available to patients is to produce literature. In fact, in doing so, every day is an opportunity to stay up to date!” says Dr. Deana.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

João Paulo Cassiano de Macedo

Dr. Joao Paulo Cassiano de Macedo is a thoracic surgeon. He is a PhD student at the University of Sao Paulo, Brazil. His research area includes chest wall and diaphragm surgery. He considers extensive chest wall resection the hottest topic in chest wall surgery. He continues to dedicate his time and effort to chest wall and diaphragm surgery, and looking for answers of what is the best tool to assess the improvement after surgery. Connect with him on Instagram.

Dr. de Macedo thinks academic writing is the perfect tool for answering questions and difficulties that doctors face every day. It is important because it is a result of years of research, and publishing the research findings is something that can change medical practice.

In Dr. de Macedo’s view, the highest quality that an author should possess is passion. The researcher needs to love what they do. Sometimes authors may face some difficulties that they think are unsolvable, and if they do not love what they do, they give up.

“Honestly, I still have difficulty allocating time for papers. The daily routine of a thoracic surgeon demands time. Generally, I dedicate my time during weekends, holidays, at night, and small pieces during the day. Sometimes it can be exhausting, but it's very gratifying at the end,” Dr. de Macedo says.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Thisarana Wijayaratne

Dr. Thisarana Wijayaratne was born and raised in Sri Lanka and he moved to the UK to study Medicine at the University of Bristol (graduated in 2016). He then attained the Membership in the Royal College of Physicians (MRCP) in 2019. Having completed his foundation year and core medical training in the West Midlands region, he moved to the East Midlands region to pursue higher specialty training in Respiratory Medicine and Internal Medicine. Dr. Wijayaratne is currently based at the Glenfield Hospital in Leicester and undertaking a fellowship year in Interventional Pulmonology and Pleural Diseases. His main research area lies within the field of pleural diseases and interventional pulmonology and he is interested in deep sedation Bronchoscopy, cryoEBUS and the use of nerve blocks in medical thoracoscopy.

Dr. Wijayaratne thinks a good academic paper is characterized by several key elements. Firstly, it should clearly define its research question or objective, providing a focused direction for the study. Methodology plays a crucial role, with transparent and well-described methods for data collection, analysis, and interpretation. Additionally, a thorough literature review situates the study within the broader context of existing research, highlighting its contribution to the field. The paper should present its findings in a structured and coherent manner, supported by clear presentation of results using appropriate visuals. Critical analysis and discussion of the findings, along with consideration of limitations and future research directions, demonstrate depth of thought and understanding. Proper citation and referencing ensure integrity and acknowledge the contributions of others. Finally, engaging writing style enhances accessibility and readability while maintaining academic rigor. Overall, a good academic paper not only advances knowledge but also effectively communicates its findings to the academic community.

Dr. Wijayaratne emphasizes that writing without biases requires a mindful and deliberate approach. It begins with acknowledging one's own biases and actively striving to recognize and mitigate them. Thorough research, encompassing diverse perspectives and evidence serves as a foundation for balanced discourse. Language choice is crucial; employing inclusive language fosters respect for diverse identities and avoids perpetuating stereotypes. Considering counterarguments and addressing them respectfully demonstrates intellectual honesty and strengthens the credibility of one's writing. Guarding against confirmation bias involves actively seeking out contradictory evidence and embracing it with an open mind. Seeking feedback from peers or mentors aids in identifying biases that may have been overlooked. Transparency is key; disclosing personal biases or conflicts of interest enhances trust and allows readers to assess arguments critically. Finally, applying critical thinking skills, questioning assumptions, and evaluating evidence objectively are fundamental practices in minimizing biases and producing more credible and objective writing.

Lastly, Dr. Wijayaratne would like to say a few words to encourage other academic writers, “Please bear in mind that your contributions are priceless, and each sentence you pen down serves as a building block towards advancement. Your scholarly works possess the power to revolutionize healthcare, deepen comprehension, and ignite the curiosity of researchers globally. Please persist in your remarkable endeavors as academic authors, bonded by a shared commitment to propel scientific advancement. Persist in writing, inquiring, and motivating others along this extraordinary journey!”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Dina Christa Janse van Rensburg

Dr. Dina Christa Janse van Rensburg is a qualified rheumatologist and Sports and Exercise Medicine (SEM) Professor at the University of Pretoria. She is also the Founder Member of the College of SEM in South Africa, the Immediate Past President of the South African Sports Medicine Association (SASMA), a Fellow of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) and a Scientific Committee Member of the IOC World Conference (Monaco, 2021 and 2024). She is the Chairperson of the Medical Advisory Panel of World Netball and a Committee Member of FIFA's Consensus Meeting on Injury and Illness Surveillance Methodology and the International Tennis Federation's Classification Science Advisory Group. Dr. van Rensburg regularly presents at conferences and lectures for the Royal Society of Medicine. She has peer-reviewed publications exceeding 100. Her DMed (PhD) proved that exercise benefits patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Her current research includes travel and jet lag in athletes, as well as injuries and illnesses in different sporting disciplines. She accompanied teams as a sports physician to the Olympic, Commonwealth, and All-African Games and was the Venue Medical Officer (VMO) for FIFA World Cup 2010. She actively practices as a rheumatologist with a special interest in SEM. Connect with her on X/Twitter.

Dr. van Rensburg has identified some potential difficulties that authors may face when it comes to academic writing. Firstly, academic writing requires careful planning, research, drafting, revising, and editing. Managing time effectively to complete these tasks within deadlines can be challenging, especially when juggling multiple assignments or balancing academic responsibilities with other commitments. Secondly, writer's block and a lack of motivation can also affect academic writing. Lastly, balancing clarity and academic rigor while adhering to disciplinary conventions can be challenging.

To allocate time to write papers, Dr. van Rensburg states that she has learned to schedule her week with specific times allocated for particular tasks. She does not allow tasks to interfere with each other. For example, when she is at the clinic, she would avoid working on academic writing between patient consultations.

Dr. van Rensburg emphasizes that it is important to follow reporting guidelines during the preparation of manuscripts. She indicates that adherence to reporting guidelines is essential for promoting transparency, quality, reproducibility, and ethical conduct in academic research. By following these guidelines, researchers can enhance the credibility and impact of their work within the scientific community.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Mary Katherine Kimbrough

Mary Katherine (Katie) Kimbrough, MD, is a physician and Associate Professor in the Division of Acute Care Surgery at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) Hospital. She obtained her bachelor’s degree at Louisiana Tech University in Ruston, Louisiana and attended Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center in Shreveport, Louisiana for medical school and general surgery residency. Dr. Kimbrough completed a trauma/surgical critical care fellowship at Louisiana State University in New Orleans, Louisiana. She is board-certified by the American Board of Surgery in both General Surgery and Surgical Critical Care, and specializes in the care of critically ill and/or injured patients. As an award-winning educator, Dr. Kimbrough is actively involved in medical student and resident education. She is also a strong advocate for diversity in training programs, and she has participated in many activities to encourage women to pursue careers in surgery. Connect with her on LinkedIn.

Dr. Kimbrough believes that a good academic paper should be thought-provoking and stimulate discussion. No matter if the paper is related to basic science, clinical practice, or educational curricula, it should investigate, challenge, or solidify current practices. In her opinion, authors must be authentic in their approach and keep an open mind to minimize bias in academic writing. They must be willing to be proved right or wrong and perhaps even be surprised by the results.

Dr. Kimbrough would like to say a few words to encourage other academic writers, “Be persistent and intentional. Surround yourself with colleagues who support your research efforts and seek out colleagues, both within and external to your organization with whom you can collaborate. Research is something that can easily get put on the back burner when considering all the various demands of academic physicians these days. I find that I am most successful with research efforts when I schedule dedicated time in my calendar for these endeavors, whether it is preparing IRBs, writing manuscripts, or meeting with colleagues to brainstorm new ideas for research projects.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Jae Kwang Yun

Dr. Jae Kwang Yun is currently an Assistant Professor at the Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery at Asan Medical Center, Ulsan University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. He provides comprehensive thoracic surgical care for benign and malignant disease, including robotic thoracic surgery with a focus on a single-port da Vinci robotic system (da Vinci SP). As a thoracic surgeon, he has achieved excellent academic results in lung cancer, esophageal cancer, and thymic epithelial tumor, and has published about 30 original articles as the first or corresponding author in leading SCI journals. Notably, his research is not limited to simply clinical research, but continuously expands to various fields such as meta-research, translational research, and basic research.

Dr. Yun believes that a well-crafted academic paper is distinguished by several essential components that enhance its quality and efficacy. These include a clearly defined research question and objective, a robust methodology supported by reliable analysis, and thoughtful interpretation. When embarking on the preparation of an academic paper, it typically begins with formulating a clear research question and delineating the population of interest. This initial step serves to establish the research's direction and ensures a focused inquiry. Equally crucial is the thorough conduct of a literature review, which demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of prior work in the field. These early stages are pivotal in laying the groundwork for a meticulously structured and enlightening academic paper, poised to contribute novel insights and knowledge.

Dr. Yun highlights the following elements to help writers avoid biases in their writing. First, authors must acknowledge that biases exist in all findings from the research. However, these biases may or may not have a significant impact on the research results. If the study's conclusion is predetermined, it may lead to underestimating favorable bias and overestimating unfavorable bias during research recruitment and analysis. Therefore, a neutral attitude must always be maintained when conducting research. In addition, authors need to be more alert to the possibility of biases that are favorable to research outcomes. If the baseline characteristics between the two groups to be compared are different, propensity score matching (PSM) or inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) should be actively used to correct the difference between the two groups. Furthermore, it should be checked whether consistent results are shown through multivariate analysis or subgroup analysis.

Lastly, Dr. Yun would like to say a few words to encourage other academic writers, “To become a good writer, one must first become a good reader. Diligently reading and researching the latest papers greatly aids authors in understanding the actual value of research and efficiently conveying key findings to readers. Then, when encountering unresolved curiosity, it is advisable to articulate it and initiate research. The process of conceptualizing how to analyze curiosity should be guided by referencing prior studies. If desired outcomes are not achieved, thoroughly investigating the reasons is crucial. This process may present opportunities for obtaining new research topics. Moreover, when expected results align, it is important to critically interpret them, considering all foreseeable biases. This process serves as a foundation for later defending comments received from reviewers after submitting the completed manuscript. Indeed, maintaining persistence and patience is crucial since these processes are challenging and time-consuming.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Stefan B. Watzka

Dr. Stefan B. Watzka, MD, BA, MA, FACS, is specialized in General Surgery and Thoracic Surgery, He is an Associate Professor of Surgery, and the Head of the Department of Thoracic Surgery at the Vienna Clinic Floridsdorf, Vienna Healthcare Group. Moreover, he is the Chairman of the Karl Landsteiner Institute for Clinical and Translational Thoracic Surgical Research (Vienna, Austria), and of the ESTS Working Group “Thoracic Infections of Surgical Interest (TISI)”. In addition, Dr. Watzka is a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons and a Member of the IASLC Rare Tumors Committee. His surgical focuses are extended pleurectomy/decortication and extrapleural pneumonectomy for mesothelioma, extended resections for advanced-stage lung cancer, VATS/RATS lobectomy, and VATS decortication. His research interests are molecular prognostic markers of mesothelioma and lung cancer. Moreover, Dr. Watzka is an on-site surgical contributor to AEGEAN, NeoADAURA, and IMpower030 trials. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

From Dr. Watzka’s view, academic writing is the main cornerstone of any academic career. Without academic writing, a researcher would not be able to communicate his/her research results to the scientific community and ultimately to the whole society. He adds, “The denomination ‘professor’ comes from Latin ‘profiteri’, which stands for confess or admit, and this depicts pretty well what an academic is supposed to do: stand before the people and defend his/her scientific results. Academic writing is the most efficient way to do so.”

In addition, Dr. Watzka believes that an academic author should not only prioritize scientific accuracy and integrity, but also be able to effectively communicate their results. Therefore, efficient academic writing needs not only attention to the scientific content, but somewhat also to the style.

“The day of an academic surgeon is always too short. Besides clinical, administrative, and teaching duties, he/she is supposed to carry on his/her research and write papers. The solution can only be some form of time management, although I’m skeptical about the classical solutions available on the market. What really works well for me is the concentration on the most important tasks of the day. Once they are done, anything else unfolds easily. Moreover, writing papers is actually for me a form of mental relaxation since it forces me to reduce distractions and to focus my thoughts,” Dr. Watzka says.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Alberto Fantin

Dr. Alberto Fantin graduated in medicine and surgery at the University of Udine, developing an experimental thesis concerning the topic of biomolecular therapeutic targets in non-small cell lung cancer. He subsequently carried out a residency in adult respiratory diseases at the Maggiore Hospital in Parma under the direction of Prof. Alfredo Antonio Chetta. He completed his training in interventional pulmonology with a one-year fellowship in Ancona, under the guidance of Prof. Stefano Gasparini. The current main research topics he deals with concern Interventional Pneumology. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

Dr. Fantin thinks academic writing is indispensable for the transmission of new discoveries, as well as for the consolidation and verification of known principles. It is a form of global communication. He believes an article should address a significant issue, provide accurate and informative content, explain its conclusions, stimulate new debate, and be connected to previous work on the topic while also projecting toward future work.

Speaking of his experience in academic writing, Dr. Fantin shares his own story, “All of us, clinical scientists, struggle to find the time to write and edit for hours the material necessary to document the clinical practice that we have the honor of carrying out every day. Despite this, as my mentors taught me, the documentation of our unique clinical experiences and participation in research on a national and global scale must be complementary to clinical practice to increase the quality of care for our patients and the satisfaction we derive from our work.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Oliver S. Chow

Dr. Oliver S Chow is an assistant professor of clinical thoracic surgery at Weill Cornell Medicine, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, and NewYork-Presbyterian Queens in New York, USA. He specializes in robotic thoracic surgery and has a particular interest in thoracic malignancies and complex central airway disease. He graduated from Cornell University and received his medical degree from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. He completed his surgical residency and cardiothoracic surgery fellowship at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston before joining the faculty at Cornell.

In Dr. Chow’s view, a well-written academic paper should read like a captivating story, while scientific papers almost always follow a well-defined structure. He thinks readers should be able to follow the narrative of how the authors identified a question worthy of exploration, what they did to test a well-defined hypothesis, and how they make sense of their results and observations. Moreover, he enjoys reading papers that include these elements effectively, because it facilitates reflection on how the paper fits (or does not fit) into the current research paradigm for the topic.

Dr. Chows recalls what Barbara Tuchman, a notable historian and author, once wrote, “Research is endlessly seductive; writing is hard work”. He believes that while engaging in a good debate with a colleague on a shared area of interest and the initial stages of investigating a new hypothesis may always be the most exciting aspects of research, the world cannot benefit from those aspects of intellectual engagement unless someone sits down and documents what has been discovered.

At last, Dr. Chows would like to say a few words to encourage other academic authors, “Sometimes it can feel as though science and academic research is barreling forward so rapidly that it is hard to ‘hop onto that moving train’ so to speak. It can be intimidating to put forth a contribution that may seem small or inconsequential. However, I like to remind myself that even small questions and studies are often the product of months to years of collaboration and persistent work from a whole group of researchers. It is a worthy endeavor and a great avenue through which we can impart positive change in this world.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Megan E. Campany

Megan Campany is an incoming PGY-1 in the integrated thoracic surgery residency program at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She received her medical degree from the Mayo Clinic Alix School of Medicine in Phoenix, AZ and a Master’s Degree in Healthcare Policy and Administration from Arizona State University. Her research currently centers around outcomes in esophageal adenocarcinoma as well as ECMO utilization and lung transplantation.

Dr. Campany believes that a strong academic paper is one that addresses a gap in the current literature with a clear and concise question, subsequently answered in logically and linearly. The reader should be introduced to recent findings in the field and understand the relevance of the question being asked. The methods should be offered in a comprehensible and reproducible manner followed by clearly communicated results. Furthermore, the discussion should restate the results, provide context and interpretation of the data, and avoid extrapolation of data or personal. If well done, the findings should be presented in a way such that the reader concludes with application to their practice. In a word, a good manuscript will not only answer the question addressed by the hypothesis but also offer further avenues to expand the field of focus with subsequent work.

Dr. Campany finds it challenging to avoid biases in writing. Having team members, including both experts in the field and those less familiar with the subject, review manuscript drafts can be very helpful. Additionally, she believes the data should largely speak for itself. If authors have to mold or selectively shape data to address a hypothesis, the work is likely to become biased. To become an expert in their research area, authors should present their data and be open to suggestions from mentors, reviewers, and other experts at every step.

“Don’t forget to expect a roadblock with every project you undertake – whether it’s with the data itself, finding the right journal and/or conference, or addressing reviewers, expecting a few bumps along the way makes the process far more manageable. Find a team that you work well with and stick with them. A team that works effectively together can transform the earliest ideas into completed manuscripts in an efficient manner. Creating a mentorship model within that team will allow both you and new team members to continually grow and develop, becoming more productive along the way,” says Dr. Campany.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Yohei Kawaguchi

Dr. Yohei Kawaguchi is a board-certified thoracic surgeon. He completed his thoracic surgery fellowship, and advanced thoracic surgical oncology fellowship at Cancer Institute Hospital of JFCR, Tokyo, Japan. In addition to surgical interventions, he is also engaged in chemotherapy for patients with advanced lung cancer, including immune checkpoint inhibitors. Currently, he is affiliated with Tokyo Medical University, Tokyo, Japan as an associate professor. His main research themes include introducing medical diagnostics, incorporating artificial intelligence, into lung cancer surgery, and exploring predictive factors for maximizing the effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced lung cancer. Dr. Kawaguchi has studied and published papers on the prognostic factors of early-stage lung cancer using AI and the impact of lymph node dissection on the effectiveness of ICI. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

JTD: What are the essential elements of a good academic paper?

Dr. Yohei Kawaguchi: To thoroughly consider what you can excel at in areas that others overlook or that are valuable but challenging to validate.

JTD: What do authors have to bear in mind during the preparation of a paper?

Dr. Yohei Kawaguchi: Create a habit of writing down and keeping track of ideas that come to mind by adding hashtags to your smartphone as soon as they occur to you. People often forget things, so record any ideas that come to mind and use hashtags to link them to other notes and develop your ideas.

JTD: Would you like to say a few words to encourage other academic writers who have been devoting themselves to advancing scientific progress?

Dr. Yohei Kawaguchi: Clinical Query (CQ) is important anyway. Always search for CQ through the patient in front of you. Keep working, believing that your work will make the world a better place.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Whitney S. Brandt

Dr. Whitney S. Brandt is an Assistant Professor of Surgery at Washington University in Saint Louis, Missouri. Her clinical area of expertise is thoracic surgery, including the treatment of lung, esophageal, mediastinal, foregut, and chest wall diseases. She has a passion for the care of all thoracic surgical patients. She is interested in studies that can truly address everyday clinical questions. She also has a great interest in thoracic oncology.

Dr. Brandt thinks a good academic paper must address an important clinical problem or develop an understanding of the disease. Next, and equally important, is that the methodology to answer the question is sound. If the methods are not sound, then the conclusions may be incorrect, and the paper is not useful.

From Dr. Brandt’s perspective, the authors need to be genuinely curious to find the correct answer and work with a great team. She believes at times authors get side-tracked by their prediction of what the result will be, and inevitably, they see an answer in a certain way. The results should be analyzed from an unbiased perspective whenever possible. It is helpful in this regard to have a team that can provide valuable perspective and input.

“I believe with each research project I learn something new. When I meet with colleagues, students, and residents and we talk about various research projects, often multiple people have a variety of takes on a topic. Every critique or perspective is important and can only improve our understanding. In the end, by listening to the various comments, we often make our study stronger and more relevant. The result: better data with which to treat our patients,” says Dr. Brandt.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Herbert Kwok Wang Chun

Dr. Herbert Kwok Wang Chun is currently working as a Clinical Assistant Professor in the Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Medicine, the University of Hong Kong. His research interests include airway diseases including asthma, bronchiectasis, and COPD. He was awarded the Li Shu Fan Fellowship for Internal Medicine to support his study in phenotyping and therapeutics of airway diseases. He was also awarded a competitive research grant to support his research in respiratory medicine. Dr. Kwok was awarded the APSR Travel Award to the JRS Annual Meeting 2024, Assembly Education Award in the 26th Congress of the Asia Pacific Society of Respirology 2022, best oral presentation in the 8th Asia Pacific Region Conference of International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (2022) and best Abstract of the Assembly (Clinical Respiratory Medicine) in the 22nd Congress of the Asia Pacific Society of Respirology (2017) in recognition of his research work.

In Dr. Kwok’s view, a good academic paper should have the following characteristics: with novel ideas, conducted by a proper method, having a sound hypothesis and question to be tested, easy to comprehend, with illustrative figures, and having a clear message delivered.

Dr. Kwok highlights that it is important for authors to keep themselves updated about the latest breakthroughs in their own fields. By knowing what others are doing, authors shall see what they can further work on, either to confirm a reported association or fill in the gaps. It is also important to have critical thinking to digest the reported findings by others and critically appraise their findings, which may also involve reviewing their data on hand and see if they can do something that has not been well conducted in the past.

“In conducting clinical studies, I realized that there is no right or wrong, and not everything is black and white. There is always a grey zone which is the area we should work on. An example is eosinophil count in COPD. While cut-offs≥ 300 and < 100 are straightforward, what about those between 100 to 299? The research gap is so interesting that I decided to work on BEC in airway diseases, from static to dynamic, in my MD program,” says Dr. Kwok.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)