In 2025, 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 (2025)

Matthew Simpson, Allegheny General Hospital, USA

Néstor J. Martínez-Hernández, La Ribera University Hospital, Spain

Sara Degiovanni, The University of Milan, Italy

Maximilian Vorstandlechner, University Hospital of Munich, Germany

Ryo Kozu, The Nagasaki University, Japan

Shohei Mori, The Jikei University Kashiwa Hospital, Japan

Tamzyn Huisamen, Tygerberg Hospital, South Africa

Ken Arimura, Tokyo Women’s Medical University, Japan

Boris Greif, The University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Slovenia

Roberto Dossi, The Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale, Switzerland

Ayman El-Menyar, Hamad General Hospital, Qatar

Jin Hwa Song, Dongtan Sacred Hospital, Korea

Brian Lee Wei Chua, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore

Ryusuke Sumiya, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Japan

Takeo Fujita, The National Cancer Center Hospital East, Japan

Shinji Kanemitsu, Anjo Kosei Hospital, Japan

Junghyun Kim, Soonchunhyang University Seoul Hospital, Korea

Marohito Nakata, Urasoe General Hospital, Japan

Jin Yong Jeong, Incheon St. Mary’s Hospital, Korea

Simon C. Graffen, John Hunter Hospital, Australia

Lilian Elisabete Bernardes Delazari, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Brazil

Mikihito Saito, Chiba University, Japan

Peter M. Ellis, McMaster University, Canada

Rodrigo Garcia Tome, Los Angeles General Medical Center, USA

Wonjun Ji, Asan Medical Center, Korea

Mohamed Haj Khalaf, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Germany

Mohamed Hassan, Magdeburg University, Germany

Kazuya Tsubouchi, Kyushu University, Japan

Klaita Srisingh, Naresuan University, Thailand

Mikito Suzuki, Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Japan

Pradeesh Sivapalan, The University of Copenhagen, Denmark

Takuya Kohama, Seirei Mikatahara General Hospital, Japan

Tatsuya Nagano, Kobe University, Japan

Britton B. Donato, Duke University Medical Center, USA

Hwa Young Lee, Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, Korea

Roi Soto-Feijóo, University Clinical Hospital of Santiago de Compostela, Spain

Marin Théry, Tours University Hospital, France

Isheeta Madeka, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, USA

Andreia Guimarães Nunes, The University of Minho, Portugal

Lior Tsviban, Schneider Children's Medical Center, Israel

Nina Maksimovic, Akershus University Hospital, Norway

Michelle Jessica Pereira, NHG Health, Singapore

Outstanding Author

Matthew Simpson

Dr. Matthew Simpson is an Internal Medicine physician. His research focuses on pulmonary and critical care medicine, particularly chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and strategies to reduce hospital readmissions. He has published multiple studies on COPD management and is passionate about improving patient outcomes through evidence-based interventions. Beyond research, Dr. Simpson is dedicated to medical education, mentoring underrepresented students through his company, Top MD LLC, which provides academic support for aspiring healthcare professionals. As he prepares to enter a Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine fellowship, he remains committed to advancing COPD research, refining risk assessment tools, and optimizing post-discharge management strategies to reduce disease burden. Connect with him on LinkedIn and X/Twitter.

Dr. Simpson thinks a strong academic paper should have a clear research question, a well-defined methodology, and rigorous data analysis. It must provide a logical flow, with a compelling introduction, a robust discussion of findings, and a conclusion that ties back to the original hypothesis. Clarity, conciseness, and coherence are crucial in making complex scientific concepts accessible. High-quality figures and tables should complement the text, enhancing comprehension. Furthermore, proper referencing ensures credibility, and the discussion should acknowledge study limitations while highlighting clinical significance.

To Dr. Simpson, the motivation for academic writing comes from a deep commitment to improving patient care and addressing gaps in medical knowledge. Research allows him to bridge the divide between clinical practice and scientific discovery, ensuring that evidence-based interventions translate into real-world benefits. The challenge of solving complex medical problems, coupled with the opportunity to mentor and inspire future physicians, fuels his dedication. Ultimately, knowing that his work can enhance outcomes for patients with conditions like COPD keeps him driven to contribute meaningfully to the field.

“Academic writing is a marathon, not a sprint. Every manuscript contributes to the collective knowledge that drives medical innovation. While the process can be challenging—filled with revisions, rejections, and reanalysis—each step refines both your research and your ability to communicate complex ideas effectively. Stay persistent, embrace constructive criticism, and remember that your work has the potential to change lives. Science thrives on collaboration, so seek mentorship, support your peers, and remain curious,” says Dr. Simpson.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Néstor J. Martínez-Hernández

Dr. Néstor J. Martínez-Hernández is a consultant thoracic surgeon at the Department of Thoracic Surgery at La Ribera University Hospital (Alzira, Valencia, Spain). His clinical practice focuses on general thoracic surgery, with a special emphasis on minimally invasive lung cancer surgery and advanced airway procedures. He has authored several clinical and experimental papers on tracheal surgery and has led multiple research initiatives. He currently chairs the Spanish ERAS Working Group on Thoracic Surgery and has published extensively on hyperhidrosis surgical treatment. Additionally, he serves on the editorial board of Cirugía Española (Spanish Surgery Journal).

From Dr. Martínez-Hernández’s perspective, academic writing is paramount for scientific progress, ensuring that knowledge is documented, shared, and critically evaluated. In medicine, it enables the dissemination of innovations, refinement of techniques, and development of evidence-based practices. A key aspect is its role in allowing researchers to build upon each other’s work. Science is cumulative; new discoveries rely on previous studies, whether by confirming findings, challenging conclusions, or applying knowledge in new ways. Moreover, academic writing fosters critical dialogue, allowing researchers to refine methodologies and improve clinical outcomes. Without it, medicine would lack the rigorous foundation needed to advance patient care in a safe, evidence-based manner.

Dr. Martínez-Hernández thinks an academic author should possess three fundamental qualities: curiosity, rigor, and clarity. Curiosity drives the research process. A good author constantly questions existing knowledge and seeks to explore new ideas that can lead to innovation. Rigor ensures that research is conducted systematically, ethically, and with attention to detail. It forms the foundation for the accurate and credible transmission of scientific knowledge. Clarity is essential for effective communication. Scientific findings are only as valuable as their ability to be understood and applied by other researchers and clinicians. Writing concisely and precisely, while avoiding unnecessary complexity, ensures that the work reaches a broader audience. Furthermore, a text should not only be rigorous and clear but also engaging, making it easier for readers to follow and absorb the information. Additionally, perseverance is key. The process of writing, facing rejections, revising, and responding to peer reviews requires resilience, as constructive criticism is an integral part of academic publishing.

In addition, Dr. Martínez-Hernández believes data sharing is crucial for advancing scientific knowledge and ensuring transparency in research. Sharing data allows for the validation and reproducibility of findings, which strengthens the credibility of scientific literature. Open access to datasets also fosters collaboration between research groups, leading to new discoveries that may not have been possible with isolated efforts. He adds that data sharing not just accelerates the application of new techniques but also helps mitigate biases, as independent researchers can analyze the same data from different perspectives.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Sara Degiovanni

Dr. Sara Degiovanni graduated in 2022 from the University of Novara, where she developed a thesis on evaluating preoperative lung function in patients undergoing major lung resections. She is currently a resident in Thoracic Surgery at the University of Milan, Italy. Her research interests focus on preoperative lung surgery evaluation for pulmonary neoplasms and lung transplantation. Her future projects and research focus on lung transplantation and surgical management of palmar hyperhidrosis.

Dr. Degiovanni reckons the primary outcome of producing scientific articles is the dissemination of research and its findings. In the medical field, this process is focused on enhancing patient care and optimizing clinical practices. Academic writing enables authors to connect with researchers, share discoveries and innovations, critique clinical practices, and lay the foundation for future advancements in medicine. Ultimately, it advances medical science by documenting research, identifying gaps, and improving patient care.

In Dr. Degiovanni’s view, an author should possess several qualities to produce valuable scientific articles. Some of the most important qualities include: critical thinking, clarity in presentation, professional ethics, and the ability to collaborate with other researchers to develop constructive ideas and analyze a subject from multiple perspectives. Besides, she believes that curiosity is an essential quality that cannot be overlooked.

Dr. Degiovanni believes that a researcher's interest and passion for their work are crucial for finding the right time to write articles, even amidst daily demands. Additionally, collaborating with other researchers and colleagues helps maintain motivation. She tries to find time to dedicate to research during the "quieter" moments of clinical practice. Passion for research and enthusiasm often overcome fatigue.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Maximilian Vorstandlechner

Dr. Maximilian Vorstandlechner graduated from Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (LMU) in 2021. He is currently working as a resident in the Division of Thoracic Surgery at the University Hospital of Munich (LMU). His research primarily focuses on lung transplantation, with recent projects investigating the respiratory microbiome, transplantation immunology, histocompatibility, and the mechanisms of acute and chronic allograft dysfunction.

In Dr. Vorstandlechner’s view, academic writing is essential because it upholds the integrity and advancement of medical knowledge by ensuring that clinical decisions and surgical techniques are based on scientific evidence rather than anecdotal experience alone. It serves as a vital platform for disseminating research findings, clinical insights, and surgical innovations to the global medical community. By fostering critical thinking, collaboration, and continuous learning, academic writing not only advances medical practice but also contributes to the development of evidence-based guidelines, ultimately improving patient care and healthcare outcomes.

Dr. Vorstandlechner thinks a key skill of an author is the ability to communicate complex research findings clearly and effectively. A great author can break down intricate topics into accessible language, allowing a broader audience to engage with and understand the significance of the work. Beyond simplification, strong analytical thinking, attention to detail, and the ability to synthesize and present evidence-based conclusions are essential for meaningful scientific contribution.

“Balancing patient care with academic writing can be challenging at times. However, I have found that some of my best research ideas emerge directly from my daily clinical experiences. There have been instances where I encountered particularly complex cases and, in searching for answers, realized that the existing literature did not fully address the issue. This is when academic writing becomes especially meaningful—it provides an opportunity to explore these gaps, contribute to the field, and ultimately improve patient care. Even more rewarding is when research is not only published but also applied by colleagues facing similar challenges, reinforcing the vital connection between clinical practice and scientific advancement,” says Dr. Vorstandlechner.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Ryo Kozu

Dr. Ryo Kozu, PT, BSc, PhD, is a physiotherapist and Professor in the Department of Physical Therapy at the Nagasaki University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Nagasaki, Japan. His clinical area of expertise is cardiorespiratory physiotherapy and rehabilitation for people with chronic respiratory disease, undergoing thoracic and major abdominal surgery, and critical illness in the ICU. His research interests include interstitial lung disease, lung cancer, and critical illness including ARDS. He leads a research program that aims to improve the outcomes of pulmonary rehabilitation, and his research group was awarded at several academic conferences, mainly in Japan.

Dr. Kozu asserts that academic writing benefits not only the staff involved in research but also the researchers, clinicians, and ultimately the patients. In his daily work, he constantly sees patients in clinical practice and discusses with staff and colleagues. Throughout this process, he thinks researchers can continue to ask clinical questions and identify problems in the research field.

“I am driven by the progress of my students, as well as young clinicians and researchers. I take pride in the fact that my research findings and published papers are utilized by many of my colleagues and frequently cited in their work,” says Dr. Kozu.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Shohei Mori

Shohei Mori, MD, PhD, graduated from The Jikei University School of Medicine in 2006 and received his PhD degree from The Jikei University School of Medicine in 2017. He is currently the Chief of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Jikei University Kashiwa Hospital, Chiba, Japan. His research area is minimally invasive thoracic surgery, thoracic oncology, and basic animal experiments of extracorporeal devices such as ECMO and extracorporeal CO₂ removal. Recently, he has been interested and involved in the project of haptic feedback and grasping force data analyses in surgical manipulation using the "Saroa" surgical robot in thoracic surgery.

Dr. Mori thinks a good academic paper should have a simple and clear message. The research topic should arise from the challenge of a question experienced in clinical practice and should be novel, shedding light on areas that have not been clarified, and providing a rationale. He asserts that a good academic paper creates new perspectives and that sharing new clinical questions with the medical community will lead to the further development of medicine.

Dr. Mori believes that fairness and honesty must always be upheld in the interpretation of research data. Analysis should be conducted with minimal preconceived notions and arbitrary interpretations, aiming for reproducible results. Active critique should be encouraged, and the research limitations must be distinctly articulated.

“It is sometimes difficult to stay motivated to do research in a busy clinical practice. However, research can also motivate you to do clinical work. When you get lost, go back to your roots and remember that you are doing research to help others and to give back to patients. By continuing and publishing your research, you are leaving a living legacy in the history of medicine,” says Dr. Mori.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Tamzyn Huisamen

Dr. Tamzyn Huisamen is currently completing her residency in Internal Medicine at Stellenbosch University and Tygerberg Hospital. She obtained her medical degree from the University of Cape Town in 2017. Her research interest, inspired by the pioneering work of her supervisor, Prof. B. Allwood, focuses on post-tuberculosis lung disease. This is a critically understudied topic that remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in South Africa.

Dr. Huisamen thinks the purpose of an academic paper is to contribute meaningfully and expand existing knowledge. A good academic paper should articulate a well-defined research question, supported by a logically structured argument that is coherent to readers. It should also demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of existing literature, effectively integrating relevant research to provide context.

In Dr. Huisamen’s view, avoiding bias in academic writing is crucial for maintaining credibility. It is important to remain open to findings that challenge your expectations and to present a balanced discussion of results. Additionally, acknowledging the limitations of the research helps prevent overgeneralization.

“I believe research has the power to inspire change and transform lives. Stay curious, always seeking new insights and perspectives. Write with integrity, ensuring that your work reflects honesty and dedication to truth. Take pride in your work, knowing that your efforts contribute to a greater understanding and make a meaningful impact on the world,” says Dr. Huisamen.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Ken Arimura

Dr. Ken Arimura is a researcher specializing in clinical oncology, with a focus on lung cancer, and mesothelioma. He is affiliated with Tokyo Women’s Medical University, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. He has been engaged in translational research to improve personalized treatment strategies for lung cancer and mesothelioma patients. He is committed to advancing the understanding of tumor biology and resistance mechanisms to develop more effective treatments.

Dr. Arimura thinks a good academic paper presents original, well-supported research with clear objectives, rigorous methodology, and clear data analysis. It provides valuable insights into the field, is logically structured, and offers a critical discussion that places the findings in a broader scientific context.

In Dr. Arimura’s view, authors should rely on objective data, use precise language, and present multiple perspectives rather than selectively emphasizing evidence that supports their hypothesis. Peer review, careful validation of data, and acknowledgment of limitations can also help to ensure a balanced approach.

“Scientific progress relies on the collective efforts of dedicated researchers who strive to uncover new knowledge and improve human health. While the path of academic writing can be challenging, every well-conducted study contributes to the greater scientific discourse. Your work has the potential to inspire future innovations and make a lasting impact in your field,” says Dr. Arimura.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Boris Greif

Dr. Boris Greif is currently an Assistant Professor of Thoracic Surgery, especially dedicated to Minimally Invasive Surgery, Esophageal Surgery, and Lung Transplantation at the University Medical Centre in Ljubljana, Slovenia. He earned his medical degree from the Medical Faculty of the University of Ljubljana and completed his residency at the University Medical Centre Ljubljana. In 2015, he joined the faculty staff at the University Medical Centre Ljubljana where he became Assistant Professor and Head of the Department of Thoracic Surgery in 2022. His research focuses on Minimally Invasive Surgery, with special dedication to VATS anatomical lung resections. Beyond his professional work, he is passionate about mentoring young surgeons and improving patient outcomes through evidence-based practices.

In Dr. Greif’s view, academic writing is essential in thoracic surgery as it supports clinical practice with scientific evidence. By systematically documenting and publishing research, researchers contribute to the continuous improvement of surgical and medical standards, ultimately benefiting patient care. In the context of malignant diseases, advancing research helps push the limits of treatment possibilities and extends survival rates. Moreover, publishing findings not only facilitates knowledge sharing but also stimulates further research, fostering innovation and collaboration within the medical community.

Dr. Greif believes data sharing is a fundamental aspect of scientific writing, as it fosters transparency, collaboration, and progress. By openly sharing researchers’ findings, they break down barriers and create opportunities for cooperation with other researchers. This exchange of knowledge not only strengthens individual studies but also contributes to a more dynamic and innovative research environment. Furthermore, networking and connecting with fellow scientists can lead to new inter-institutional collaborations and multicentric trials, ultimately enhancing the quality and impact of research. In an era of rapidly advancing medicine, the collective effort of researchers working together is essential for driving meaningful discoveries and improving patient care.

“I would like to encourage fellow academic writers who have dedicated themselves to advancing scientific progress. Our commitment should be driven by the motivation to use science and knowledge in service of people—to improve health, enhance well-being, and make a meaningful impact on our communities. Research and academic writing are not merely intellectual pursuits; they are essential contributions to society, ensuring that medical advancements translate into better patient outcomes and a healthier future for all. By sharing our findings, we not only push the boundaries of science but also uphold our responsibility to serve humanity through knowledge and innovation,” says Dr. Greif.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Roberto Dossi

Dr. Roberto Dossi is an anesthesiologist at the Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale (EOC) in Switzerland. He obtained his medical degree from the University of Milan and specialized in Anesthesia, Intensive Care, and Pain Therapy at Vita-Salute San Raffaele University in Milano. His main clinical and scientific focus is regional anesthesia, and he is currently the principal investigator in several clinical studies, including randomized and double-blinded trials exploring its various applications. He is pursuing the European Diploma in Regional Anesthesia (EDRA) and further developing his skills in biostatistics to strengthen the methodological rigor of his research. Dr. Dossi also teaches at the Università della Svizzera italiana (USI), where he lectures on clinical anesthesia and supervises medical students’ theses.

Dr. Dossi believes a good academic paper is one that combines scientific rigor with clinical relevance. It should have a clear, focused research question, a solid methodological foundation, and a transparent analysis. In his field, regional anesthesia, it is especially important that the study design mirrors real-world clinical practice, so that the findings are not just statistically significant but also meaningful for patient care. Finally, a good paper should be written in a way that is accessible, engaging, and honest about its limitations.

Dr. Dossi thinks authors should always keep the readers in mind when they prepare their writing. Clarity is key, both in terms of scientific rationale and language. It is essential to be methodologically sound, transparent about biases, and rigorous with data interpretation. Collaboration with statisticians early in the process can prevent avoidable weaknesses. Above all, honesty in reporting—not only results, but also limitations—is fundamental to building trust and advancing science responsibly.

“While working on our randomized trial comparing ESP and TPV blocks for VATS, one of the most interesting aspects was managing the multiple-blind design in a real surgical setting. Coordinating between anesthesiologists, surgeons, nurses, and data collectors without breaking blinding required an almost choreographed workflow. There was a moment when a patient, after surgery, spontaneously said, ‘I don't know what you did, but I feel quite well.’ Of course, we didn’t know yet which block she had received—but it reminded us that behind every protocol and statistical analysis, there’s a person whose recovery we’re trying to improve,” shares Dr. Dossi.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Ayman El-Menyar

Dr. Ayman El-Menyar works as Director of Clinical Research in Trauma and Vascular Surgery at Hamad General Hospital (HGH), Qatar & Associate Professor of Clinical Medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College. He is a Professor (Principal Research Scientist) at HGH. He worked as a cardiologist from 1993-2011. He is a senior consultant of cardiology at the Egyptian Medical Syndicate. He completed MBChB, a Cardiology Master’s degree, MRCP (England), and FRCP (Glasgow). He is a FACC, and FESC. He previously worked as Director of Clinical Research at Westchester Medical Hospital and NY Medical College. He authored and co-authored 500 peer-reviewed articles, 200 international abstracts, and six chapters in books, and was a co-editor of one book (Resuscitation), Istanbul Tip Kitabevi 2024. He mentors medical students, residents, and fellows for research projects, master’s, or PhD degrees. His research interests include Biomarkers, coronary artery disease, heart failure, shock index, scoring tools, brain injury, stress-induced disorders, genetics, metabolomics, and AI.

In Dr. El-Menyar’s view, clinical practice, basic science, and academic writing are the three main pillars that lead to up-to-date knowledge, optimizing patient healthcare, community progress, and health sector maturation. To ensure academic writing is up-to-date, he thinks one should be involved in professional, relevant organizations and network collaboration, attending high-caliber conferences, seminars, mentorship, and workshops. One should also read leading medical journals on a regular basis, reviewing novel research and following current guidelines and consensus. Besides, he believes one should be part of multidisciplinary teams and use advanced tools for data analysis and literature review, and utilize recent technology, including AI, online educational webinars, and courses.

According to Dr. El-Menyar, academic writing requires time and effort; however, it is a valuable pursuit full of challenges. This dedication positively impacts daily practice, enhances the learning curve, and benefits one’s career. He notes that seeing a paper discussed at a prestigious conference, published in a top-tier journal, contributing to ongoing scientific discourse, and achieving a higher h-index is truly remarkable.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Jin Hwa Song

Dr. Jin Hwa Song is a Clinical Assistant Professor in the Department of Pulmonology at Dongtan Sacred Hospital, with a Ph.D. from Seoul National University. Her research primarily focuses on airway diseases, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma. She is committed to delivering comprehensive care based in the local community in Korea.

Dr. Song thinks a good scientific paper explores questions that many people are curious about and offers a fresh perspective and approach. In addition, a strong paper validates its hypothesis with convincing results.

From Dr. Song’s perspective, it is important to provide background on the current state of research and clearly articulate the rationale for the study when writing a scientific paper. It is crucial to communicate findings and their implications clearly, ensuring that readers, particularly clinicians, can understand how the results may influence practice, such as improving diagnostic strategies or patient care protocols.

Dr. Song believes that the advancement of medicine must be based on evidence-based research and science. By sharing researchers’ findings, they contribute to a global pool of knowledge that benefits both current practice and future generations. These changes can lead to changes in clinical guidelines in the short term and ultimately improve public health.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Brian Lee Wei Chua

Dr. Brian Lee Wei Chua is a consultant at Respiratory & Critical Care Medicine, Singapore General Hospital. He has a special interest in Pleural Diseases, Thoracic Oncology, and Interstitial Lung Disease. Much of his focus in the last few years has been on Pleural Diseases and Thoracic Oncology as he believes more can be done in the field of thoracic oncology, in terms of screening, diagnostics and management. He hopes to improve early detection rates for lung cancer, which will allow them to achieve better outcomes for patients.

According to Dr. Chua, a good academic paper has a specific question, which addresses a key research question. It can be anything from pathophysiology, and clinical presentation to diagnosis and management. The scientific methodology has to be conveyed clearly, to allow the readers to have a better understanding of how the study was performed and whether the results apply to their patient cohort. Authors have the responsibility to report data accurately and interpret the data sensibly, accounting for any potential biases that can affect the interpretation of the results. Lastly, it will be crucial for authors to share how their paper has a positive impact on current understanding and practices.

Dr. Chua believes the only way to keep up with the latest developments is to constantly keep a lookout for any new interesting developments. He dedicates a short amount of time every night to reading up on some of the latest developments in Respiratory Medicine and if anything interesting pops up, he shares it with his team. Moreover, they will do a deep dive into the article to see if there is anything worth exploring. He finds group discussions much more interactive and enjoyable and often gains more insights as compared to if he was reading it on his own.

“When I first started academic writing, I was very fortunate to have patient and nurturing mentors who guided me through the entire process. My first paper underwent countless revisions before it was finally accepted for publication. By the time it was published, it was a far cry from my very first draft. Looking back at my journey, it would not have been possible if it were not for my mentors. I will continue to strive on and hopefully, one day make a difference to the scientific community, and most importantly, our patients,” says Dr. Chua.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Ryusuke Sumiya

Ryusuke Sumiya, MD, PhD, is an Assistant professor in General Thoracic Surgery at Juntendo University School of Medicine. His specific fields of interest and research are redox balance and homeostasis of lung epithelia, thoracic oncology, and robotic surgery. He is training for robotic surgery under Prof. Kenji Suzuki (Juntendo University School of Medicine), and he is recently focusing on carcinogenesis of lung cancer in young patients, novel technique of robotic surgery, and redox balance and immune escaping of lung cancer.

Dr. Sumiya thinks many researchers have novel and unique ideas, and the academic paper should provide a platform for sharing these ideas fairly and justly. A good academic paper should describe its role and place, and demonstrate what needs to be done in the future and what has already been clearly shown.

In Dr. Sumiya’s view, to avoid biases, researchers should be supervised by several expert authors regardless of research fields while young, and they should learn to write from different perspectives. Although the amount and levels of evidence that each person can present varies, it is important to continue to disseminate evidence in accessible ways, from case reports and basic research to randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Takeo Fujita

Dr. Takeo Fujita is a Professor of Esophageal Surgery at the National Cancer Center Hospital East, Japan. He grew up in Japan and received a Bachelor’s and Ph.D. from the University of Okayama in 2001. He joined Hillman Cancer Center at the University of Pittsburgh as a Postdoctoral Associate in 2005. Having graduated from the University of Pittsburgh, he joined the National Cancer Center Hospital as a Gastrointestinal Surgeon in 2008. He was positioned as Consultant Surgeon in Esophageal Surgery in 2010. Thereafter, he has been in the position of Director at the Division of Esophageal Surgery at National Cancer Center Hospital East Japan in 2019. He has received various awards - the most representatives being the 2017 most Valuable Paper Japan Esophageal Society, the 2005 Young Investigator Award in Asian Cancer Conference, Fellow of the American College of Surgeons (ACS) in 2015, and Fellow of the International Society of Surgery in 2015.

In Dr. Fujita’s opinion, a high-quality academic paper addresses a well-defined clinical question through the application of methodologically rigorous and scientifically sound approaches. The validity and relevance of the results are, of course, equally critical. Notably, many papers that are regarded as exemplary in the field tend to produce findings that resonate with the expectations of experienced clinicians—expectations often informed by prior data. Such alignment, without major contradictions or discrepancies, may contribute significantly to the perceived credibility and impact of the study.

Dr. Fujita believes the psychological dimensions of the researcher also play a critical role while methodological rigor and sound research design are undeniably important. Researchers often unconsciously develop hopes and expectations toward their hypotheses or study subjects. Thoughts such as “I hope this treatment proves effective” or “Positive results are more likely to be accepted for publication” can subtly influence data interpretation and selection. These preconceived notions may manifest as bias without the researcher even realizing it. Therefore, fostering a mindset that welcomes critical dialogue and alternative viewpoints is essential for recognizing one’s own cognitive blind spots. Furthermore, particular attention must be paid to confirmation bias—the tendency to focus on evidence that supports one's hypothesis while disregarding conflicting data. Even when striving for scientific objectivity, one may unknowingly engage in the act of validating a preferred narrative. Remaining constantly aware of this risk is vital to preserving the integrity of the research process.

“To all fellow academic authors striving at the forefront of thoracic oncology and surgical science: Your continued dedication to advancing knowledge in this rapidly evolving field is both commendable and inspiring. As we navigate an era marked by transformative innovations—ranging from robotic-assisted surgery and artificial intelligence to immune checkpoint inhibitors, circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), and multi-omics-based precision medicine—your work plays a vital role in shaping the future of patient care. The challenges we face are complex, but so too are the opportunities. Every thoughtfully designed study, every rigorously analyzed dataset, and every manuscript you bring to the scientific community serves as a building block for the next generation of diagnostics, therapies, and surgical strategies. Let us remain committed to excellence, integrity, and collaboration in our research endeavors. Together, through science and shared inquiry, we move closer to the ultimate goal: improving outcomes and quality of life for patients around the world. Your contributions are not only shaping academic discourse—they are driving the very progress of medicine,” says Dr. Fujita.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Shinji Kanemitsu

Dr. Shinji Kanemitsu is the Chief of the Department of Cardiovascular Surgery at Anjo Kosei Hospital, Japan. He graduated from Mie University in 1996 and earned his PhD from the same institution. His clinical and research expertise lies in aortic surgery, mitral valve repair, and minimally invasive cardiac procedures. He has a strong interest in surgical innovation and sustainability in healthcare. His recent work focuses on the impact of surgical strategy on outcomes in chronic aortic dissection and complex mitral valve pathologies, including severe annular calcification. He has published numerous peer-reviewed articles and actively contributes to academic conferences. As an educator, he is passionate about training the next generation of surgeons and advancing international collaboration in cardiovascular surgery.

According to Dr. Kanemitsu, a good academic paper presents a clear hypothesis, uses appropriate methods, and provides new insights supported by solid data. It should be well-structured, concise, and easy to understand, even for non-native readers. Most importantly, it should contribute meaningfully to clinical practice or future research.

Dr. Kanemitsu believes authors should ensure accuracy, transparency, and ethical conduct. Clarity of logic, honest interpretation of data, and respect for co-authors' contributions are also essential. Understanding the target audience and journal guidelines is key to effective communication.

Dr. Kanemitsu thinks sharing clinical experience and research findings can improve patient care globally. He feels a responsibility to contribute knowledge, especially from underrepresented regions. Academic writing also fosters self-improvement and collaboration across borders, which motivates him deeply.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Junghyun Kim

Dr. Junghyun Kim is a board-certified allergist and clinical immunologist at Soonchunhyang University Seoul Hospital. Her research focuses on airway inflammation, asthma phenotypes, and the immunologic mechanisms underlying allergic diseases. She has published extensively on type 2 inflammation, eosinophilic airway disorders, and the clinical application of biologics. Recent projects include evaluating cytokine profiles in asthma subtypes and exploring the interplay between the airway microbiome and immune responses. She also plays an active role in translational research aimed at improving diagnostic strategies and targeted therapies for patients with severe asthma and allergic comorbidities.

Dr. Kim believes that academic writing is essential for effective scientific communication. It allows researchers to present findings in a clear, structured, and evidence-based manner, facilitating understanding, replication, and further advancement of knowledge. She thinks it is also an opportunity for self-growth. Writing helps her stay current with evolving trends in her field, encourages critical thinking, and pushes her to synthesize information more effectively. Feedback from peer reviewers is especially valuable—it often highlights methodological or conceptual aspects she may have overlooked and challenges her to refine arguments. She explains that these interactions not only improve the quality of her work but also broaden her perspective. In this sense, academic writing is more than a means of communication; it is a continuous learning process that strengthens both her research and clinical practice.

Dr. Kim emphasizes that a thorough engagement with both clinical applicability and scientific principles is essential to producing analytical and insightful writing. Study results or clinical cases that provide practical tips for patient care are helpful. She also values papers that explain how diseases work or point out things she might have missed in practice. She wants to understand not just what researchers observe, but also why they see it. These insights often lead her to re-examine routine decisions and adjust her clinical perspective. In her view, critical writing is about staying curious and reflective while striving for meaningful interpretation.

“I would like to share one experience that stands out and involved a major issue with the statistical methods in a previous project,” says Dr. Kim, “During peer review, concerns were raised, prompting us to recheck the raw data and perform a complete re-analysis. In doing so, we discovered a significant statistical flaw that had been overlooked and that impacted the interpretation of our findings. The revision process took over a year, involving multiple rounds of feedback and analysis. Although it was a challenging and, at times, frustrating process, it became one of the most valuable learning experiences of my academic career. The reviewers' thoughtful comments guided me to better understand statistical rigor and improved the clarity and structure of the manuscript. More importantly, it helped me grow as a researcher—teaching me to be more cautious, thorough, and reflective in both analysis and writing. The final outcome was not only a stronger paper but also a stronger mindset.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Marohito Nakata

Dr. Marohito Nakata is a physician at Urasoe General Hospital in Okinawa, Japan. While he belongs to the Department of Cardiology, he also works as a general internist, providing care across a broad spectrum of internal medicine. He recently wrote a paper on acute focal bacterial nephritis (AFBN) in adults to increase awareness of this often-overlooked condition and its diagnostic challenges. Currently, his research focuses on percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), where he is evaluating the efficacy of intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) and atherectomy devices in the treatment of severely calcified coronary lesions, using optical coherence tomography (OCT) for imaging assessment. He is committed to contributing to evidence-based cardiovascular care through both clinical practice and research.

Dr. Nakata thinks that a good academic paper addresses a clinically relevant question with clarity, methodological rigor, and originality. In his recent study on acute focal bacterial nephritis (AFBN) in adults—a condition often underrecognized and misdiagnosed—he aimed to fill a knowledge gap by highlighting diagnostic challenges and treatment considerations. He believes that a good paper not only presents data, but also provides new perspectives, contributes to better clinical decision-making, and encourages further investigation in the field.

To avoid bias, Dr. Nakata believes that it is crucial to approach each study with clinical humility and scientific objectivity. In the AFBN paper, he carefully reviewed prior literature, acknowledged diagnostic uncertainties, and avoided overgeneralization despite his findings. Collaborating with peers, incorporating external feedback, and clearly stating limitations also help ensure a balanced and unbiased interpretation of results.

“Scientific writing is often a long and uncertain journey, especially when dealing with rare or overlooked conditions like AFBN in adults. Every well-documented case and carefully constructed paper adds value to the body of knowledge and may positively influence clinical practice. I encourage fellow researchers to stay persistent, remain curious, and trust that their efforts will eventually resonate with the scientific community,” says Dr. Nakata.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Jin Yong Jeong

Dr. Jin Yong Jeong is a thoracic surgeon at the Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Incheon St. Mary’s Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea. His clinical and academic focus is centered on thoracic surgery, with particular expertise in robotic-assisted procedures. His recent work includes robotic thoracic surgeries for lung cancer, esophageal cancer, and mediastinal tumors. In addition, he has been actively involved in advancing surgical approaches for hyperhidrosis, with a special interest in predictive techniques to minimize postoperative compensatory hyperhidrosis. He is also engaged in the surgical management of pectus excavatum, contributing to both clinical care and research aimed at improving outcomes. Through his clinical practice and academic endeavors, he is dedicated to enhancing patient-centered care and refining minimally invasive surgical techniques in the field of thoracic surgery.

Dr. Jeong believes that a significant challenge in academic writing is effectively communicating complex surgical concepts and data in a way that is clear and accessible to an international audience. Particularly in thoracic surgery, where clinical decisions are often nuanced and individualized, it can be difficult to generalize findings without oversimplifying. Moreover, ensuring scientific accuracy and logical coherence while choosing suitable terminology to effectively convey both the surgical techniques and their clinical implications often requires meticulous attention and revision. Lastly, navigating the peer-review process can also be demanding, especially when addressing conflicting reviewer feedback.

Dr. Jeong highlights that it is important to critically evaluate the quality and relevance of the studies, not just their statistical outcomes when synthesizing evidence. In fields such as robotic thoracic surgery, hyperhidrosis, and pectus surgery, where techniques evolve quickly, the most recent and methodologically sound evidence should be prioritized. He also recommends considering the broader clinical context—such as patient selection criteria, institutional experience, and long-term outcomes—when integrating findings. He thinks that authors should avoid over-reliance on retrospective studies alone, and aim to present a balanced view, acknowledging both strengths and limitations of the available literature. Ensuring transparency in interpretation and avoiding confirmation bias are essential throughout this process.

“I chose to publish in JTD because of its strong reputation for high-quality, peer-reviewed research in the field of thoracic surgery and its global readership. The journal’s commitment to multidisciplinary perspectives and its openness to innovative techniques—such as robotic approaches and function-preserving procedures—aligns well with my research interests. Furthermore, the editorial team’s professionalism and the transparent review process create an encouraging environment for authors. Publishing in JTD has helped disseminate my work to a broader audience and facilitated academic exchange on an international scale,” says Dr. Jeong.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Simon C. Graffen

Dr. Simon Graffen is a Respiratory and Sleep Medicine Physician with a special interest in respiratory infectious diseases, pleural disease, and point-of-care ultrasonography. He completed his respiratory medicine training in Australia at John Hunter Hospital in Newcastle and Royal North Shore Hospital in Sydney. He has contributed to multiple peer-reviewed publications in areas relating to interventional bronchoscopy, pleural malignancy, and the impact of the COVID-19 epidemic. He is currently undertaking further training in clinical infectious diseases.

In Dr. Graffen’s view, the standard of a good academic paper can be achieved in multiple ways. Firstly, it may directly answer a relevant clinical question and be generalizable to his current patient population. A paper that he can apply to his day-to-day practice immediately after reading is of high value. Secondly, it brings new insight into the existing field of evidence through a novel approach. This can promote methods of investigation to further fields but may also provide a whole new approach to the clinical management of an existing problem (an example is the treatable traits paradigm and its application to asthma assessment and management in recent years). Lastly, he finds that there is great value in well-written and timely review articles. Some areas can be daunting to approach without a recent review article and a systematic presentation of the underlying evidence base can be missed in more concise reviews such as those on UpToDate or feel inaccessible when outlined in the appendices of official guidelines.

Dr. Graffen believes that it is essential to engage and collaborate with as many colleagues and other academics as possible to ensure the writing remains current. This can be through local journal clubs and teaching, attendance of national meetings, or correspondence with international colleagues and journals. Through ongoing exposure and collaboration, researchers gradually develop an understanding of the existing evidence. Initially, they identify gaps in their knowledge, then learn what current experts in the field know, and finally, they clarify what they still want to understand.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Lilian Elisabete Bernardes Delazari

Dr. Lilian Elisabete Bernardes Delazari is a physiotherapist at the Adult Intensive Care Unit of the Hospital de Clínicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Brazil. She holds a Master's degree in Surgical Sciences and is currently pursuing a PhD in the same field at UNICAMP. Her research focuses on mechanical ventilation, ventilatory weaning, ICU-acquired weakness (ICUAW), and respiratory muscle effort in critically ill patients. She is the co-coordinator of the postgraduate program in Intensive Care Physiotherapy at the Faculty of Medical Sciences (FCM–UNICAMP), where she mentors students and contributes to the development of evidence-based care protocols. Her current studies investigate diaphragmatic muscle activity using surface electromyography (sEMG), inspiratory muscle pressure (Pmus), and airway occlusion pressure (P0.1), with the aim of supporting personalized strategies for ventilatory support and early rehabilitation. She is committed to integrating clinical research and physiotherapy practice to improve outcomes in intensive care.

Dr. Delazari believes academic writing plays a fundamental role in advancing science and healthcare practice. This approach fosters knowledge sharing, testing, and refining through constructive dialogue. In the field of intensive care, where decisions are often complex and time-sensitive, publishing robust evidence is essential to guide clinical protocols and ensure patient safety. Academic writing also helps bridge the gap between research and practice by transforming clinical observations into structured knowledge that can inform guidelines and shape future interventions.

Dr. Delazari emphasizes the importance of deeply engaging with evidence, questioning assumptions, and considering alternative perspectives when writing critically. Critical writing goes beyond simply describing findings; it involves analyzing and interpreting those findings within their broader context. This process requires comparing various sources, identifying gaps or inconsistencies, and articulating how the work contributes to the field. Peer feedback, methodological rigor, and clear justification of choices also strengthen the critical quality of academic writing.

“My most significant academic experience was adapting my master's project, which ultimately resulted in the publication of an article in your journal. Conducting research in an intensive care setting presents unique challenges. For example, data collection demands precision, constant availability, and deep collaboration with the clinical team. In contrast to the controlled environments of a laboratory, the research conducted in an ICU necessitates flexibility and resilience due to the rapid shifts in patients' conditions. Transforming this complex, time-consuming process into a publishable manuscript was a highly rewarding endeavor. Academic writing encompasses scientific accuracy, perseverance, and the ability to translate real-world clinical experiences into structured, valuable knowledge,” says Dr. Delazari.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Mikihito Saito

Dr. Mikihito Saito is a pulmonologist and PhD candidate at the Department of Respirology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Japan. His research focuses on clinical studies of treatment strategies for lung cancer.

Dr. Saito believes the goal of clinical research is to generate data that can be applied to real-world practice. Academic journals should have the foresight to identify studies that can change clinical practice or have the potential to do so in the future. In addition, journals should provide educational advice for researchers and authors to help advance the future of medicine.

From Dr. Saito’s perspective, it is important to identify clinical questions that emerge from daily practice in clinical research. He believes that an author should maintain a sense of curiosity, approach patients with sincerity, and show respect for previous studies.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Peter M. Ellis

Dr. Peter M. Ellis is a Professor in the Departments of Oncology and Health Research Methods, Evidence and Innovation (HEI) at McMaster University. He is a former Division Head of Medical Oncology at the Juravinski Cancer Centre (JCC). He obtained his medical degree at the University of Sydney. He completed a Masters of Medicine (Clinical Epidemiology) and a PhD also at the University of Sydney. Dr. Ellis moved to Canada in October 2000. He is an Executive Member of the Canadian Cancer Trials Group (CCTG) Lung Disease Site Committee and was Co-Chair of Ontario Health-Cancer Care Ontario’s Practice Guideline Initiative, Provincial Lung Disease Site Group from 2010-2022. He is also an investigator on multiple CCTG and pharmaceutical industry-sponsored multicentre phase III clinical trials in breast and lung cancers.

Dr. Ellis believes that academic writing is crucial for sharing and applying primary medical research findings. Even though major medical meetings are well attended, only a fraction of healthcare providers attend in person and see the presentation of major research findings at scientific conferences. The publication of both primary and secondary research findings, as well as an expanded array of studies that may not be showcased at major scientific conferences, is crucial for enhancing the accessibility of these discoveries to the entire healthcare community. Evidence-based medicine is a fundamental principle of the healthcare environment in which researchers operate. Communication of medical research findings through academic writing and peer review is an enabler of the practice of evidence-based medicine. 

Dr. Ellis thinks an author needs to possess many qualities. They need to be inquisitive to learn how to ask questions. Any good research begins with a good question. They need to be analytic and methodical. Well-conducted research and its reporting must focus on appropriate research methods and design. Authors need to communicate clearly and succinctly. In mentoring junior colleagues, writing succinctly is one of the biggest challenges. Lastly, he thinks that authors need to be realistic in their reporting. Understanding the strengths and limitations of research findings is essential to avoid overstating the results.

“I face many competing demands on my time as an academic medical oncologist. The demands of clinical work can expand and take over my time if I allow it to. I think it is important to determine priorities and this includes work-life balance. One needs to set aside dedicated nonclinical time in order to meet academic goals and productivity, such as writing. Create ‘to-do’ lists with time frames to complete the activities. Avoid over-commitment. It is important to be realistic in the ability to take on new tasks. Commit to writing up and completing manuscripts and follow through on this. It is unfortunate to complete a research project without publishing. Avoid things you are less interested in, as they will always fall to the bottom of the ‘to-do’ pile. Set aside blocks of time for writing. Turn off email and other electronic distractions, wherever possible, when writing and make the most use of this time. Lastly, I think you need to be prepared to work outside of regular work hours at times, in order to get manuscripts completed,” says Dr. Ellis.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Rodrigo Garcia Tome

Dr. Rodrigo Garcia Tome is a Venezuelan-Italian physician with a strong commitment to assisting underserved communities. He earned his medical degree from the Central University of Venezuela and completed his internal medicine residency at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai St. Luke’s-Roosevelt in New York City. He completed a fellowship in Pulmonary and Critical Care at the University of Southern California, followed by specialized training in Interventional Pulmonology at UCLA. Currently, he serves as Director of the Interventional Pulmonology, Bronchoscopy, and Pleural Diseases Program at Los Angeles General Medical Center, the largest public hospital in Los Angeles. His professional focus lies in improving access to high-quality care for vulnerable populations. His research is centered on pleural diseases and developing innovative, cost-effective approaches to complex procedures using simple and widely available tools. He aims to broaden access to Interventional Pulmonary care across diverse healthcare settings.

Dr. Tome emphasizes that academic writing is fundamental to scientific advancement. It turns anecdotal experience into evidence-based knowledge, allowing researchers to separate observation from truth. This is especially important in the evolving field of Interventional Pulmonology, where many clinical practices still lack robust data. With so much left to discover, the field offers an exciting opportunity for academic physicians to generate meaningful research, influence clinical standards, and help shape the future of the specialty. It is a pivotal time to contribute to the growth of Interventional Pulmonology through rigorous, impactful science.

Dr. Tome believes a key quality in any physician is a persistent sense of curiosity and a commitment to critically reassessing every clinical decision. It is essential to continually review the reasons for choosing a particular approach and the evidence supporting it. Most importantly, the author should consider ways to improve it—can the decision or procedure be made safer, easier, or more comfortable for the patients? This approach fosters lifelong learning, promotes innovation, and enhances patient-centered care.

“The passion for the profession and a commitment to advancing the field through academic work should never feel like a burden. Medicine is undeniably demanding, but it is also deeply fulfilling. Engaging in academic research offers a valuable chance not only to push the boundaries of knowledge, but also to improve patient care by making it safer, more effective, and more compassionate,” says Dr. Tome.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Wonjun Ji

Dr. Wonjun Ji is an interventional pulmonologist in the Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Asan Medical Center (AMC) and serves as an Associate Professor at the University of Ulsan College of Medicine. He earned his medical degree from Kyung Hee University and completed his internship, residency in internal medicine, and fellowship in pulmonary and critical care medicine at AMC. Since joining the faculty in 2019, he has specialized in advanced bronchoscopic procedures and the multidisciplinary management of lung cancer. His recent research focuses on interventional bronchoscopic techniques, including bronchoscopic cryobiopsy and ablation, as well as simulation-based training in interventional pulmonology. He is actively involved in multiple collaborative research initiatives, both nationally and internationally, aimed at improving the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer.

Dr. Ji’s considers a good academic paper as one that is easy for readers to understand and connect with. This comes from presenting a clinically meaningful topic, using sound and reasonable methodology, and sharing the results in a clear and logical way. When the paper also addresses a topic of high clinical interest—something that many in the field are curious about—it becomes even more impactful and rewarding.

Dr. Ji believes that one of the most important skills for an academic author is the ability to write clearly and concisely. It is not only about presenting the facts but also about narrating the research story in a scientifically rigorous and easily understandable manner for readers. He thinks conveying complex ideas in a well-organized and accessible manner is at the heart of good academic writing.

“I find that every step in the process of writing a paper—from planning the research to submitting the manuscript—is special in its own way. Like many researchers, I see each project as a meaningful journey, filled with its own small challenges and quiet satisfactions. Every paper leaves a mark, and I treasure each experience,” says Dr. Ji.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Mohamed Haj Khalaf

Dr. Mohamed Haj Khalaf is a dedicated thoracic surgeon and clinical researcher affiliated with the Department of Thoracic Surgery at University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Germany. His research focuses on surgical oncology in thoracic malignancies, particularly non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and rare thoracic tumors such as primary pulmonary synovial sarcoma. He has been involved in clinical studies evaluating surgical outcomes, lymphadenectomy strategies, and prognostic factors such as spread through air spaces (STAS). He is actively engaged in evidence-based research, systematic reviews, and interdisciplinary clinical practice. He is also passionate about medical education and contributes to academic teaching in thoracic surgery.

Dr. Khalaf believes a good academic paper is grounded in scientific rigor and clarity. It should start with a well-defined research question, followed by a clear methodology, reproducible data, and an objective interpretation. Structure and logical flow are crucial, and each section—from abstract to conclusion—should serve a purpose. High-quality figures and tables, a critical discussion of results, and awareness of existing literature are essential. The writing must be precise and concise, avoiding unnecessary jargon while ensuring accuracy. Finally, ethical considerations and transparency in conflicts of interest and funding sources are fundamental.

In Dr. Khalaf’s view, authors should be mindful of their audience, journal scope, and submission guidelines. Careful planning before writing can save time—starting with a clear hypothesis and outline helps streamline the process. Authors should ensure that all co-authors have contributed significantly and are appropriately credited. Plagiarism, data manipulation, or overstating findings must be avoided at all costs. A critical self-review before submission, ideally with input from colleagues, helps catch errors and improve clarity. Lastly, attention to referencing and citation style is often underestimated but critical to maintaining scholarly integrity.

“Scientific writing is both a responsibility and a privilege. Every contribution, no matter its size, enhances our collective understanding and ultimately improves patient care and scientific knowledge. The process can be challenging and sometimes frustrating, especially in the face of rejection or revision. However, persistence, curiosity, and integrity pay off. I encourage fellow researchers to remain passionate, collaborate openly, and never underestimate the impact of their work. Your efforts matter, and the scientific community thrives because of your commitment,” says Dr. Khalaf.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Mohamed Hassan

Dr. Mohamed Hassan works as a Consultant Thoracic Surgeon in the Department of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgery at Magdeburg University, Germany. His research interests include the lung cancer microbiome and patient-centered care for operable thoracic tumors. Other areas of focus are sublobar lung resections and septic thoracic surgery.

Dr. Hassan believes that academic writing is essential for sharing knowledge and advancing scientific evidence. It is crucial not only in multicenter trials or specialized basic research but also in everyday clinical practice. When researchers encounter unique cases or unexpected findings, academic writing allows them to share these experiences, compare them with those of their peers, and raise new questions. Over time, this process greatly enhances the development of clinical evidence and improves patient care.

Dr. Hassan indicates that data sharing is vital for ensuring transparency and promoting the growth of scientific knowledge. Researchers should aim to establish standardized procedures for publishing datasets alongside original research articles. While data sharing is becoming increasingly common in basic science, it is not yet fully established in clinical research. Researchers must balance transparency with their ethical duty to protect patient confidentiality.

In Dr. Hassan’s view, it is important to conduct a comprehensive review of all available literature related to the writing topic. The process should start with formulating a clear and clinically relevant research question. The key is to design a study that most simply and effectively answers the question. Collaborating with colleagues who have diverse expertise, such as clinical knowledge, study design, and statistical analysis, is significant for ensuring the methodological quality and relevance of the work.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Kazuya Tsubouchi

Dr. Kazuya Tsubouchi is affiliated with the Department of Respiratory Medicine at Kyushu University. He actively engages in both clinical practice and research, working extensively on diffuse lung disease patients. His primary research area is respiratory medicine, with a particular focus on diffuse lung diseases such as pulmonary fibrosis. His recent projects include cohort studies on idiopathic interstitial pneumonia and COPD, as well as interventional research targeting progressive pulmonary fibrosis. In addition to clinical research, he is dedicated to discovering the pathophysiology of pulmonary fibrosis and associated pulmonary hypertension through basic research. He is also actively guiding graduate students, devoting himself to advancing understanding of these complex diseases through rigorous research.

Dr. Tsubouchi believes that a good academic paper adds meaningful knowledge to its field. While originality is important, he also values papers that explore aspects that many people might overlook or might assume without thorough examination. The findings should be supported by solid evidence and presented with a clear message that makes an impact. Ensuring accuracy and validity is essential in scientific research. He thinks the best papers offer new insights and reliable methods that can lead to further discoveries, advancing the field.

According to Dr. Tsubouchi, authors constantly encounter clinical questions in their practice and research. Whether to turn these questions into a published paper depends on both curiosity and perseverance. Additionally, effective communication of ideas to readers requires logical and critical thinking. To see a paper through to completion, passion plays a crucial role—specifically, a passion for sharing one’s ideas and a genuine desire to help patients. This passion drives the persistence needed to navigate the challenging process of research and writing, ultimately leading to meaningful contributions to the field.

“The reason I chose to submit my work to the Journal of Thoracic Disease is that it is a reputable platform that publishes a wide range of research in the field of respiratory and thoracic medicine. With its long-standing history and extensive international readership, I believe it provides an excellent opportunity to share my research findings with clinicians and researchers around the world,” says Dr. Tsubouchi.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Klaita Srisingh

Associate Professor Klaita Srisingh is a pediatric pulmonologist in the Department of Pediatrics at the Faculty of Medicine, Naresuan University, Thailand. She previously served as Assistant Dean for Postgraduate Studies at the Faculty of Medicine at Naresuan University. She works at Naresuan University Hospital and teaches both undergraduate and postgraduate medical students. She has a keen interest in respiratory tract infections, especially those caused by the respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).

Dr. Srisingh believes that academic writing is important because it enables individuals to present ideas and research findings in a clear, structured, and evidence-based manner. It also fosters critical thinking, analytical skills, and intellectual discipline. Such writing plays a vital role in the communication and advancement of academic knowledge.

In Dr. Srisingh’s view, an author should possess several important qualities. The most essential is the ability to present their work honestly and without bias. Findings should be reported accurately, explained with evidence and reasoning. What they discover could potentially contribute to new knowledge that has not been identified before. Furthermore, responsibility and self-discipline are vital qualities; without them, successfully completing any research work becomes challenging.

Dr. Srisingh dedicates her early morning hours and evenings after work to writing and research. She typically arrives at the office about half an hour to an hour earlier than her colleagues and leaves about an hour later. By following this routine every day, she ensures that she has time for her research. The moments when no one else is around are particularly special to her; the quiet and calm atmosphere allows her mind to work at its best.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Mikito Suzuki

Dr. Mikito Suzuki is a general thoracic surgeon at Tokyo Metropolitan Cancer and Infectious Diseases Center Komagome Hospital, Japan. He trained at the Division of Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan, where he also obtained a PhD in 2023. He is a board-certified member of the Japanese Association for Chest Surgery. His clinical focus is the surgical management of thoracic malignancies, particularly lung cancer and thymic epithelial tumors. Recently, he has also become interested in diagnostic bronchoscopy, specifically the use of cryobiopsy for peripheral pulmonary lesions, mediastinal lymph nodes, and the pleura.

Dr. Suzuki asserts that a good academic paper must convey a single, clear key message across its title, abstract, and conclusion. To achieve this clarity, it is crucial to start with a well-defined clinical question and research aim. This foundational step ensures that every section of the paper logically supports the central message. Furthermore, adhering to reporting guidelines is essential for ensuring transparency, standardization, and overall quality.

From Dr. Suzuki’s perspective, authors, especially clinicians, should ground their work in daily clinical practice that is informed by the latest evidence. This means critically questioning examinations or procedures that lack strong evidentiary support and continuously seeking areas for improvement. This constant critical appraisal of their practice not only leads to better patient care but also uncovers the most relevant research questions.

“Academic writing is a critical process for addressing unanswered clinical questions, ultimately leading to improved patient outcomes. Furthermore, I believe this endeavor not only advances medical care but also fosters our growth as clinicians,” says Dr. Suzuki.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Pradeesh Sivapalan

Dr. Pradeesh Sivapalan is a Respiratory Physician and Associate Professor at Copenhagen Respiratory Research, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, and the University of Copenhagen. His research bridges clinical medicine and translational science, focusing on acute exacerbations of COPD, lung infections, bronchiectasis, and the reduction of medication-related adverse effects. He combines biomarker discovery, point-of-care diagnostics, and personalized treatment strategies to improve survival and quality of life in respiratory medicine. With 147 peer-reviewed publications in leading journals, he has established a strong international profile. As Associate Editor for several journals and an active member of global research networks, he fosters collaborations that accelerate innovation. His vision is to redefine the management of respiratory infections and improve treatment of acute exacerbations of COPD by enabling individualized interventions that reduce hospitalizations, enhance recovery, and advance evidence-based healthcare at both national and global levels. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

Dr. Sivapalan considers a strong academic paper to offer a clear and significant contribution to its field, underpinned by rigorous methodology and transparent, logical reporting. It should start with a well-defined research question, employ an appropriate study design, and use robust statistical or analytical approaches. A high-quality paper situates its findings within the broader literature, openly addresses its limitations, and draws conclusions fully supported by the data. Equally important are clarity, coherence, and readability, enabling other researchers, clinicians, or policymakers to interpret, trust, and apply the results effectively.

Dr. Sivapalan’s motivation for academic writing stems from the opportunity to generate and share knowledge that can shape clinical practice, improve patient outcomes, and strengthen evidence-based medicine. He values the process of transforming complex data into clear, actionable insights that inform clinicians, researchers, and policymakers. Writing is also a way to showcase and disseminate the collective efforts of his team and collaborators, encouraging dialogue and innovation within respiratory medicine. Moreover, it sharpens his critical thinking, hones his ideas, and strengthens his ability to communicate effectively, skills that are essential for both scientific and professional growth.

In Dr. Sivapalan’s view, authors should focus on a clear, relevant research question, use appropriate methods, and present data accurately. They need to interpret results in context, acknowledge limitations, and avoid overclaims. Clarity, logical structure, adherence to journal guidelines, and ethical practices, including proper authorship and disclosure, are essential for a credible and impactful paper.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Takuya Kohama

Takuya Kohama, MD, is a thoracic surgeon at Seirei Mikatahara General Hospital, Hamamatsu, Japan. He specializes in uniportal video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) and complex segmentectomy, focusing on precise hilar dissection and intersegmental division. His recent research includes slow-firing stapling for pulmonary vessels and long-term outcomes of pleural covering with larger polyglycolic acid sheets. Passionate about surgical education, he organizes low-cost, hands-on training programs that provide young surgeons with extended practice time, aiming to standardize advanced minimally invasive techniques both nationally and internationally.

Dr. Kohama thinks that academic writing transforms surgical experience into reproducible knowledge. It ensures that innovative techniques are validated, standardized, and shared beyond local practice, enabling global improvements in patient care. Sharing operative data and surgical videos can significantly enhance technical learning, reduce complications, and promote global training efforts, as long as ethical standards and patient consent are upheld. He has recently started sharing surgical videos on YouTube to improve accessibility and foster global collaboration.

Additionally, Dr. Kohama believes that clinical observations can serve as the foundation for research. Even minor technical improvements, when published, can inspire others and influence surgical practices around the world. He encourages all researchers to share their findings, as doing so may positively impact more lives than they realize.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Tatsuya Nagano

Dr. Tatsuya Nagano is a lecturer of the Division of Respiratory Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Kobe University Graduate School of Medicine. His research area is respiratory medicine, and recently, he has been interested in immune activation factors.

In Dr. Nagano’s view, the motivation for conducting research may be intellectual curiosity or a desire to help others, but research is important because it brings greater happiness to humanity. When approaching academia as beginners, researchers tend to adopt a passive attitude and absorb knowledge. However, when pursuing academic studies or writing one’s own papers, it is necessary to adopt a critical attitude. He believes that scientific rigor is enhanced by constantly reviewing results critically, rather than simply being satisfied with them. As a fundamental premise, it is important that research be conducted scientifically and with the sincerity of the researcher.

“Even if you submit your work to a respected journal with confidence, it could still be rejected. Conversely, a paper that you believe lacks significance might very well be accepted by a quality journal.There may be value in your paper that you cannot see, so it is important to persistently continue submitting it,” says Dr. Nagano.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Britton B. Donato

Dr. Britton B. Donato, MD, MPH, MS, is an advanced fellow in Lung Transplantation and Minimally Invasive/Robotic Thoracic Surgery at Duke University Medical Center. His research focuses on lung transplantation outcomes, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), robotic thoracic surgery, and thoracic oncology. His recent projects explore the role of artificial intelligence in predicting donor-recipient outcomes as well as improving donor utilization in lung transplantation, and advancing robotic approaches for complex thoracic surgery, and the treatment of early-stage esophageal cancer. He is committed to pursuing an academic career integrating high-volume lung transplantation, robotic thoracic surgery, research, and surgical education.

Dr. Donato believes a good academic paper addresses a genuine gap in the literature while maintaining clear clinical relevance. The research question should build on prior work, thoughtfully identifying and addressing its shortcomings. Methods must be rigorous, transparent, and reproducible. A well-crafted paper objectively reports findings, reduces bias, and acknowledges limitations, allowing readers to interpret the results accurately.

From Dr. Donato’s perspective, minimizing bias begins with recognizing one’s own biases. From there, studies should be designed to maximize objectivity and reduce confounding. When presenting results, do so transparently by emphasizing both strengths and limitations, and refrain from overstating conclusions. By grounding interpretation in data rather than assumptions, authors allow readers to form their own evidence-based judgments.

“Stay persistent. The demands of clinical work, limited funding, and the challenges of publication can make research feel discouraging. Yet advancing knowledge is a fundamental responsibility of our profession. Every study, no matter how small, moves the field forward. With persistence and dedication, we can leave the field stronger than we found it,” says Dr. Donato.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Hwa Young Lee

Dr. Hwa Young Lee is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Allergy at Seoul St. Mary’s Hospital, Korea. She earned her degrees from the Department of Biological Science at KAIST and the Department of Medicine at Ajou Medical Center. Motivated by the desire to study disease from a human perspective rather than the cellular level, she chose a career in medicine, which has provided both clinical and research opportunities. Her work focuses on airway diseases such as asthma and chronic cough. Recently, she investigated the relationship between the gut microbiome and airway inflammation using an asthma mouse model. In collaboration with colleagues specializing in cough research, she has also been learning about cough hypersensitivity and its neuro-inflammatory mechanisms.

Dr. Lee asserts that a good academic paper requires sound scientific methods, reliable results, and a balanced discussion. During her time as a college student at KAIST, she thought that academic papers primarily served as a means of communication among specialists interested in specific research topics. Today, however, publications are often regarded as tools for professional validation or career advancement, frequently judged by impact factors. She believes that a valuable scientific paper addresses current needs in its field and contributes to significant academic progress. To achieve such insights, it is essential to make consistent efforts while remaining flexible and open to new trends.

Science advances rapidly, and researchers are often overwhelmed by the vast number of publications released in a short period. In Dr. Lee’s view, it is impossible to keep up with all the knowledge published in scientific journals. The best way to remain up-to-date is to focus on one’s own research field, while acknowledging that no one can be fully informed about every aspect of science. Attending conferences organized by societies in other fields, such as artificial intelligence or medical informatics, offers valuable opportunities to network within academia and beyond. She believes that such interdisciplinary interactions among scientists from diverse fields foster the exchange of ideas and can ultimately generate novel insights for advancing her own research.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Roi Soto-Feijóo

Dr. Roi Soto-Feijóo obtained his MD from the University of Santiago de Compostela in 2019 and completed his residency in Pulmonology at the University Clinical Hospital of Santiago de Compostela in 2024, where he currently practices. His clinical work focuses on interstitial lung diseases, as well as bronchoscopy and pleural procedures. From the beginning of his career, he has been strongly committed to clinical excellence and continuous professional development. His particular interest in advanced respiratory therapies has led him to undertake specialized training both nationally, at the multidisciplinary Sleep and Ventilation Unit of Fundación Jiménez Díaz (Madrid), and internationally, at the Lane Fox Unit of St James’s Hospital in London (2023), a renowned center for mechanical ventilation and complex respiratory disorders. In 2024, he completed the Master’s Degree in Intermediate Respiratory Care at CEU San Pablo University, further consolidating his expertise in respiratory failure and advanced chronic respiratory diseases.

In Dr. Soto-Feijóo’s view, a good academic paper should combine methodological rigor with clarity of communication. It is essential to define a precise research question, apply an appropriate and transparent methodology, and present results that are both reproducible and clinically or scientifically relevant. Equally important is a well-structured discussion that critically evaluates the findings within the context of existing literature, while also acknowledging limitations. Finally, concise and precise language, together with logical organization, allows the message to be accessible to both specialized and broader audiences.

Dr. Soto-Feijóo indicates that an academic author needs a balance of analytical, critical, and communication skills. Analytical and critical thinking are essential for accurately interpreting data and identifying both the strengths and weaknesses of a study. Writing skills are essential for conveying complex ideas in a clear and persuasive manner. In addition, perseverance and attention to detail are indispensable throughout the peer-review process, while teamwork and openness to constructive criticism ensure continuous improvement as a researcher.

“An interesting experience during academic writing was the challenge of my first manuscript submission. Despite having carefully prepared the work, the reviewers provided numerous critical comments. At first, this felt discouraging, but revising the paper under their guidance transformed it into a much stronger and clearer study. This experience taught me that peer review, rather than being an obstacle, is a valuable opportunity for growth and for producing more rigorous scientific contributions,” says Dr. Soto-Feijóo.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Marin Théry

Dr. Marin Théry is a thoracic surgery resident at Tours University Hospital. He earned his medical degree, focusing his research on post-operative infectious morbi-mortality, which was recently published in JTD. As he approaches the end of his residency, he is now focusing on Surgical Oncology, travelling across France to learn from experts in the field, especially at the Marie Lannelongue Hospital and the Léon Bérard Cancer Center.

Dr. Théry believes that academic writing is important not only for global medical knowledge but also for the authors themselves. Writing clear and concise studies that can be shared enables researchers to improve their daily practices. In the meantime, designing studies, writing down results, and rephrasing conclusions in proper academic language helps them to become more concise and clearer about their topic.

In Dr. Théry’s opinion, the most important writing skill is the curiosity to read. Reading both significant and less impactful research papers is essential for learning from them. This allows authors to identify flaws and biases and how to avoid them. More importantly, it gives researchers ideas about what could be done and what to investigate.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Isheeta Madeka

Isheeta Madeka, MD, is a PGY-4 general surgery resident at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital in Philadelphia with a strong foundation in clinical research and a passion for advancing thoracic surgery. She completed a dedicated research year in the Thoracic Surgery Laboratory under the mentorship of Dr. Olugbenga Okusanya, Associate Professor of Thoracic Surgery, Vice Chair of Inclusion, Diversity, and Equity, Director of the Jefferson Chest Wall Center, and Associate Director of the Thoracic Surgery Fellowship Program. During this time, her work focused on three key areas: utilizing large databases to evaluate clinical outcomes in robotic thoracic surgery, investigating public-health disparities in lung cancer, and contributing to the growing body of knowledge on slipping rib syndrome. As a trainee, her research has strengthened her commitment to enhancing patient care through evidence-based practice by addressing inequalities and optimizing surgical outcomes in thoracic surgery.

Dr. Madeka believes that a good academic paper addresses an important gap in the literature. It begins by asking a clear and concise research question and is supported by a strong methodology. It concludes with a thorough discussion on how the data are situated within the current literature, either by challenging or supporting existing findings. To prepare for writing, she thinks it is essential for authors to clearly acknowledge and communicate the limitations of their research. This practice demonstrates intellectual honesty, transparency, and maturity, and it can provide valuable guidance for further research to the academic community.

“As a trainee, my dedicated research year was instrumental in my research portfolio. It allowed me to fully commit my time and focus on immersing myself in the scientific process, from idea generation to manuscript writing. Additionally, identifying a strong research mentor is instrumental in cultivating the clinician-scientist mindset as an early trainee interested in pursuing academic surgery,” says Dr. Madeka.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Andreia Guimarães Nunes

Dr. Andreia Guimarães Nunes is a radiology resident and invited professor at the University of Minho, where she has been teaching since the beginning of her residency. Currently in her third year of training, she combines her love for medicine, education, and technology with a growing interest in exploring how programming and data science can enhance medical imaging in the future. Passionate about the analytical and detective side of radiology, she enjoys the challenge of uncovering subtle clues in images—an experience she likens to being “a bit of a Sherlock Holmes.” Outside of the hospital, she finds balance through nature, hiking, and sports, which keep her energized and grounded. She believes that curiosity, empathy, and creativity are as essential to good medicine as technical expertise. Connect with her on LinkedIn.

Dr. Nunes believes that academic writing is essential to science because it enables researchers to convert individual findings into a shared understanding. It ensures that ideas and discoveries can be shared, scrutinized, and expanded by others. In medicine, it is not just about documenting results; it is about building trust, transparency, and progress. Academic writing teaches them to think rigorously, communicate clearly, and take responsibility for the knowledge they contribute to the world. It is how researchers connect curiosity with impact.

In Dr. Nunes’s view, critical writing begins with awareness of context, evidence, and perspective. It is about questioning why things are the way they are and how they could be seen differently. In medicine, this means not accepting data at face value but analyzing it with both logic and curiosity. Reading widely, reflecting deeply, and being open to multiple interpretations are key. Being critical also means being humble—acknowledging uncertainty and being willing to rethink assumptions when new information emerges.

“Balancing academic writing with the demands of clinical practice can be exhausting, and there are moments when motivation naturally fades—especially during long, intense stretches of clinical work. Yet, what keeps me going is the investigative nature of radiology itself. During my residency, I remember writing about a complex case and realizing how much it resembled solving a mystery: each image a clue, each symptom a potential lead. That ‘Sherlock Holmes’ element is what truly makes me happy and fuels my motivation—the challenge of piecing together subtle details to uncover the truth. For now, I’m enjoying the journey: learning, exploring, and writing about the puzzles that make this field so intellectually and personally rewarding,” says Dr. Nunes.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Lior Tsviban

Dr. Lior Tsviban is a pediatric pulmonologist at the Pulmonary Institute and the Graub Cystic Fibrosis Center of Schneider Children's Medical Center, Israel. He earned his medical degree from Tel Aviv University in 2014, followed by a residency in General Pediatrics at Assaf Harofe Medical Center. His research focuses on chronic airway diseases—particularly Cystic Fibrosis and Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia—in the pediatric population. His recent projects include a multicenter study examining vaccine coverage among individuals with Cystic Fibrosis and a study exploring the impact of seasonal variability in nasal nitric oxide measurements for Primary Ciliary Dyskinesia screening.

The way Dr. Tsviban sees it, a good academic paper should address a meaningful question within its field and contribute something original and insightful to existing knowledge. It should be well-organized and clearly written, with a transparent and well-explained methodology that enables readers to easily follow the author’s reasoning and conclusions.

Dr. Tsviban believes that a good author should remain up to date with the latest research in their field and possess strong communication skills to facilitate collaboration with other researchers. They should think creatively and critically, approaching problems from new perspectives. Persistence is crucial because the publication process can be highly competitive and challenging.

“I chose to publish in JTD for several reasons. First, the journal’s focus on respiratory and thoracic diseases makes it an ideal platform for my area of research. Second, its strong reputation and rigorous peer-review process ensure the publication of high-quality scientific work. Finally, as an open-access journal, JTD enhances the visibility and impact of its articles, making research widely accessible to the global scientific community,” says Dr. Tsviban.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Nina Maksimovic

Dr. Nina Maksimovic earned her MD from the University of Oslo, graduating in 2020. Following the completion of her formal education, she pursued a position as a Surgical Research Fellow at the University of Oslo, where she specialized in surgical research. Currently, she is advancing her academic journey through a Ph.D. program focused on Robotic Surgery within General Thoracic Surgery, with an emphasis on the surgical treatment of patients diagnosed with lung cancer. In addition to her research endeavors, she is also a surgical resident at Akershus University Hospital in the Department of Vascular and Thoracic Surgery. Connect with her on LinkedIn.

Dr. Maksimovic believes that a strong academic paper begins by engaging the reader's attention and fostering a genuine desire to continue reading. Research should be clear, engaging, and easy to follow, so that even complex ideas feel accessible. The structure should flow naturally, guiding the reader through the argument without confusion. Most importantly, the paper must answer its research questions precisely and thoughtfully, showing a real understanding of the topic. She also values clarity over complexity—well-formulated writing and solid evidence speak louder than jargon. Ultimately, a strong paper continues the conversation, prompting reflection or further inquiry; it not only informs but also inspires further thought and curiosity about the subject.

From Dr. Maksimovic’s perspective, authors should begin with a clear research protocol and statistical analysis plan, ensuring that the design and methods align with the research questions. Once the analysis is complete, the initial results should guide the paper’s structure and focus. She often starts by creating a table and one or two key figures that best capture the main findings—these visual summaries help clarify the narrative and highlight what truly matters. Being well-informed about the current state of research in the field is equally important. This ensures the work is placed in the correct scientific context, aligns with ongoing discussions, and addresses a genuine knowledge gap. In preparation, authors should also acknowledge and transparently address the study’s limitations, honestly highlighting any weaknesses in methods or data. This transparency enhances credibility and enables the research to make a meaningful contribution to the field.

“To fellow academic writers, your dedication matters. The process of exploring questions, testing ideas, and sharing insights is how science moves forward, even when progress feels slow. Embrace curiosity and persistence, and do not be afraid to take intellectual risks—meaningful contributions may come from asking questions others might overlook. Celebrate small victories along the way, whether it is a well-crafted argument, a clear figure, or a new connection between ideas,” says Dr. Maksimovic.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Michelle Jessica Pereira

Michelle Pereira is a Principal Research Analyst at Health Services and Outcomes Research, NHG Health, Singapore. Having previously worked as a physiotherapist, her current research portfolio consists predominantly of economic evaluations of healthcare interventions implemented in Singapore. She has led research projects at hospitals and national medical centres in Singapore, mainly in orthopaedics, geriatrics, allied and mental health, and palliative care specialities. In her first competitively awarded research project, she studied the end-of-life outcomes of patients in the Home Ventilation and Respiratory Support Service (HVRSS) at Tan Tock Seng Hospital in Singapore. HVRSS is the sole, dedicated, multi-disciplinary service for the specialised needs of Singapore’s adult ventilation-assisted patients, an under-studied group. She demonstrated potential reductions in end-of-life healthcare utilisation among HVRSS decedents with advance care plans, their place-of-death outcomes, together with end-of-life preference concordance. This is pertinent information that can facilitate future planning of high-quality end-of-life care for HVRSS patients.

In Dr. Pereira’s view, academic writing skills help researchers articulate their research questions, methods, and significance convincingly. Writing well-structured and persuasive grant proposals through robust academic writing techniques is crucial for securing funding. Academic writing is critical for being able to plan potential research studies, illustrate the feasibility of implementation, and obtain support (financial or otherwise) to facilitate successful completion of research projects. At the other end of the lifespan of a research project, academic writing allows researchers to clearly and effectively share their study results with the scientific community, policymakers, and practitioners. Effective communication and dissemination of research outputs enable tangible impact through clinical practice and/or changes, achieving better healthcare outcomes for patients.

Dr. Pereira thinks that the key skill sets of a good author include the ability to translate complexity into simple concepts, which greatly helps the ease of dissemination and uptake of content being communicated, and critical thinking that allows one to analyse information effectively, interpret, and draw meaningful conclusions.

“The first research paper I wrote after completing my Honours research project was supervised by a very esteemed professor at my University. I recall sending my supervisor a draft of my paper that I took a long time to prepare, and receiving a returned version with substantial track changes all over the document. The returned version was both unrecognisable from what I prepared, but at the same time, completely based on what I had written. My paper was accepted for publication by a respected journal without much hassle at a later stage. This was a very strong memory at the beginning of my research journey, where I started to appreciate what academic writing was all about,” says Dr. Pereira.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)