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
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
Grzegorz M. Gryszko, Military Institute of Medicine-National Research Institute, Poland
Madalina Grigoroiu, Antony Private Hospital, France
Sung Choi, Monmouth Medical Center, USA
Hee Chul Yang, Northwestern University, USA
Hidenobu Iwai, Akita University, Japan
An Thi Nhat Ho, MD Anderson Cancer Center, USA
Dustin R. Mills, the Queensland Children’s Hospital, Australia
James D. Ross & Maja Engler, Benchmark Biotech LLC, USA
Taizo Goya, University of the Ryukyus Hospital, Japan
Wataru Shigeeda, Iwate Medical University, Japan
Kazuki Noda, Osaka Metropolitan University, Japan
Henrique Kim, A.C. Camargo Cancer Center, Brazil
Christopher Kloth, Ulm University Medical Center, Germany
Noriko Hayama, Koto Hospital, Japan
Yizhan Guo, The University of Pittsburgh, USA
Carolina Cáfaro, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, Brazil
Felicia S. W. Teo, Mount Elizabeth Medical Centre, Singapore
Francesco Donati, The Giannina Gaslini Children’s Hospital, Italy
Mitsuharu Hosono, Nara Medical University, Japan
Akio Sakamoto, Kyoto University, Japan
Julian Brouillette, Emergency Medicine, Belgium
Toshio Shiotani, Kagawa Prefecture Central Hospital, Japan
Fahim Kanani, The Edith Wolfson Medical Centre, Israel
Kheira Hireche, CHU Montpellier, France
Darren Turner, The University of Cincinnati Medical Center, USA
Potjanee Korrungruang, Rajavithi Hospital, Thailand
Ritesh Agarwal, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, India
Bo-Mi Gil, The Catholic University of Korea, Korea
Shinji Sasada, The Fraternity Memorial Hospital, Japan
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)
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)
Grzegorz M. Gryszko
Dr. Grzegorz M. Gryszko graduated in 2021 from the Medical University of Warsaw, Poland. He currently conducts research at the National Institute of Tuberculosis and Lung Diseases, focusing on non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), particularly the prognostic value and optimal extent of mediastinal lymph node dissection. At the same time, he is pursuing his residency in Plastic Surgery at the Military Institute of Medicine in Warsaw. His clinical interests include acute burn management and complex reconstructive procedures following extensive oncologic resections. By combining acute burn surgery and reconstructive perspectives, he aims to improve both survival and postoperative quality of life for patients undergoing major surgeries.
Dr. Gryszko believes that academic writing is the foundation of scientific progress. It allows clinical experience and research findings to be shared, verified, and built upon by others. In medicine, it transforms individual cases and observations into structured knowledge that guides daily practice. Through publication, researchers ensure that innovation is transparent, reproducible, and ultimately beneficial for patients.
From Dr. Gryszko’s perspective, a good academic author should combine curiosity, analytical precision, and intellectual honesty. Curiosity drives meaningful research questions; precision ensures validity and clarity; honesty builds trust. Effective communication is as important as thorough data research; it should be clearly written to inform, inspire, and enhance clinical practice.
Data sharing is prevalent in recent years. To Dr. Gryszko, sharing data can enhance the reliability of science by enabling independent validation, facilitating meta-analyses, and promoting collaborative innovation. In his field—thoracic oncology and reconstructive surgery, shared datasets enable subgroup analyses that single centers cannot achieve alone.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Madalina Grigoroiu
Dr. Mădălina Lidia Grigoroiu, MD, PhD, is a thoracic surgeon affiliated with Antony Private Hospital in Paris, France, and the University of Galați, where she serves as Lecturer in the Department of Morphological and Functional Sciences. Her work focuses on thoracic surgery, especially minimally invasive and robotic techniques, lung cancer, and ways to improve surgical planning—such as using 3D printing for segmentectomies. She has coordinated several research projects, including studies on predicting postoperative air leaks and the benefits of 3D modeling in lung resections. She is involved in several professional medical societies in Europe and continues to combine clinical practice, teaching, and research in her field.
According to Dr. Grigoroiu, an academic paper tells a meaningful story about a question that matters. A good academic paper is clear, coherent, and credible. It helps readers understand why the proposed question is important and what gap or problem the paper aims to address. A well-crafted paper synthesizes findings and reflects on their significance for the field, while also posing future inquiries. Additionally, a high-quality paper acknowledges its own limitations, which enhances its credibility.
Dr. Grigoroiu is primarily motivated by the desire to address real-world issues and enhance patient care in her writing. Writing is, for her, also a way to shape ideas clearly, to turn scattered observations into knowledge that can be tested, debated, or built upon.
“Scientific progress is built on countless careful steps. To everyone who spends long hours thinking, writing, revising, and trying again: your work truly matters. Research can be slow, frustrating, and often under-acknowledged, but it is also one of the most meaningful forms of service. Curiosity, persistence, and integrity make science stronger, even when results are negative, uncertain, or progress feels small,” says Dr. Grigoroiu.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Sung Choi
Dr. Sung H. Choi, MD, is an interventional pulmonologist whose work focuses on complex airway disorders and lung nodules. He completed his Interventional Pulmonology fellowship at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai. During his fellowship, he developed a strong interest in airway management and thoracic oncology under the mentorship of Dr. Udit Chaddha, which led to the work being recognized by JTD. He currently practices at RWJ Barnabas Health at Monmouth Medical Center in New Jersey, where he continues to care for patients with challenging airway and pleural diseases. His ongoing research centers on improving diagnostic yield and therapeutic strategies in airways obstruction, with particular interest in bronchoscopic innovation and evidence-based procedural management.
Dr. Choi thinks that academic writing is fundamental to patient care. It serves as the primary way clinicians and researchers communicate new evidence, clarify uncertainty, and refine best practices. Well-conducted and transparently written studies shape clinical guidelines, influence decision-making at the bedside, and ultimately determine what is considered the standard of care. Academic writing also ensures that discoveries are critically evaluated, reproducible, and accessible to the whole medical community. He believes that, in this way, scientific writing directly contributes to improved quality of care by helping physicians understand what treatments are most effective, safest, and most appropriate for their patients.
In Dr. Choi’s view, balancing clinical work and academic writing is a challenging task. He tries to integrate writing into the natural flow of his day. He keeps notes on clinical questions or cases that spark an idea, which helps projects evolve gradually rather than all at once. When a project is active, he sets aside consistent blocks of focused time. To him, working with supportive colleagues/co-authors also makes a difference. Sharing the workload and encouraging each other keep projects moving even when the schedule is busy.
Dr. Choi asserts that Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval is essential as it ensures that research involving patients is conducted ethically and responsibly. It provides an independent review of the study’s risk, benefits, and consent process. Doing this acts as a safeguard for participants’ rights/privacy and their well-being. To him, the IRB process also strengthens the scientific integrity of the work by ensuring that the study design is reasonable and the data are collected appropriately. Without IRB approval, participants could be placed at risk, and the resulting data would lack credibility. He strongly believes that the IRB process ultimately protects both patients and the validity of the research itself.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Hee Chul Yang
Hee Chul Yang, MD, PhD, is a thoracic surgeon, currently completing a 2-year lung transplant fellowship at Northwestern University. His clinical work focuses on lung transplantation, organ procurement, and perioperative management of advanced lung disease. His research interests center on outcomes after lung transplantation, optimization of surgical strategies, and the application of national databases to address clinically relevant questions. Recently, he has worked on projects examining “Age-based Screening for Lung Cancer Surveillance” and “Laterality Matters: Impact of Graft Side on Outcomes After Single Lung Transplantation”. His research aims to connect surgical practice with evidence-based medicine, providing data that can directly inform clinical decision-making and enhance patient care in thoracic surgery.
From Dr. Yang’s perspective, a good academic paper begins with a clear and clinically meaningful question, arising from a surgeon’s firsthand experience and intuition at the bedside. Strong methodology, appropriate statistical analysis, and transparent reporting are essential to ensure credibility. Logical structure and clarity in writing are equally important, enabling readers to understand why the study was conducted, how it was executed, and what its findings truly signify. Finally, a strong discussion should place the results in the context of existing literature and honestly address limitations, reinforcing the paper’s scientific integrity.
Dr. Yang points out that authors should always keep the reader in mind. Simplicity, clarity, and the avoidance of repetition are core principles that he believes every author should consistently uphold when writing a scientific paper.
“After struggling together for about ten months, each paper we write becomes our cute and precious baby. These babies grow up by collecting citations and eventually become respectable adults in the academic world. In this family, the first author is the mother, and the corresponding author is the father. Since mothers tend to form a stronger emotional attachment to their babies, I insist on remaining a mother—and plan to do so even when I turn fifty,” says Dr. Yang.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Hidenobu Iwai
Dr. Hidenobu Iwai is currently working at the Department of Thoracic Surgery, Akita University in Japan. His research area focuses on lung cancer.
Dr. Iwai believes that academic writing is an essential tool for continually questioning daily clinical practice and avoiding being constrained by fixed ideas, so that doctors can strive to provide the greatest possible benefit to their patients. On a personal level, producing written output helps him organize his knowledge, gain new insights into clinical practice, and deepen his understanding of statistical interpretation in the literature.
Dr. Iwai emphasizes the importance of authors sharing their research data. By doing so, researchers can combine larger datasets and perform analyses that are more statistically significant. In addition, data sharing enables verification by others, allowing errors or potential misconduct to be detected. He believes data sharing plays an important role in maintaining the integrity and progress of scientific research.
“Although I do not believe that each of my papers directly benefits patients, I am convinced that these individual efforts will eventually accumulate and lead to meaningful achievements. It would be more than enough for me if my work could be of help to someone, somewhere in the world,” says Dr. Iwai.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
An Thi Nhat Ho
Dr. An Thi Nhat Ho is an interventional pulmonologist at Banner MD Anderson and an adjunct assistant professor of pulmonology at the University of Texas at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Her research interest is early lung cancer diagnosis and treatment. Her past projects were about optimizing peripheral lung nodule biopsy accuracy and safety. Her current projects focus on the use of artificial intelligence for lung cancer diagnosis and treatment, as well as the effectiveness of common lung nodule surveillance tools in the context of robotic bronchoscopy.
According to Dr. Ho, good academic writing should include the following essential elements. The chosen topic has not been previously studied and is significant for clinical practice. The research question is clear. The method is well written, with biases being controlled as much as possible. The data collection and analysis should be reliable. The discussion and interpretation should be thoughtful.
Dr. Ho also stresses that authors should understand study methodology and carefully plan to write a thorough and clear manuscript. Moreover, authors must be able to have communicate effectively with collaborators.
As an internal medicine intern, Dr. Ho frequently observed that hospitalized patients struggled to sleep during their admission. Motivated by this observation, she designed and conducted an inpatient survey to study sleep difficulties in the hospital setting. Although she initially assumed the project would be straightforward because it involved only a survey, it proved far more challenging than expected. Lacking prior experience in sleep research, she sought feedback from multiple attending physicians to refine the study design. Since it was not feasible to survey hundreds of patients alone, she recruited co-residents and trained them to administer the survey, which presented additional logistical challenges. From study conceptualization to data collection, the process took more than six months. Even during patient interviews, unexpected difficulties arose, including confusion, hearing impairment, and misunderstanding of survey questions, necessitating repeated revisions and real-time adjustments to the survey instrument. “I managed most of these challenges independently while balancing the demands of a busy residency. When the study was ultimately published, the sense of accomplishment was overwhelming. Through this experience, I gained invaluable lessons in rigorous methodology, effective collaboration, and openness to expert feedback. This first research project in the United States profoundly shaped my passion for future clinical research,” says she.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Dustin R. Mills
Dr. Dustin Mills, MBBS, FRACP, is a Staff Specialist Paediatric Respiratory and Sleep Physician working across Townsville University Hospital in North Queensland and the Queensland Children’s Hospital in Brisbane, Australia. He completed specialist training in Paediatric Respiratory Medicine at the Queensland Children’s Hospital and undertook an additional fellowship year at the IWK Health Centre through Dalhousie University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada. He has worked closely with Indigenous communities in North Queensland and Atlantic Canada, and has provided ongoing respiratory consultations to paediatricians in Pacific Island nations. He is currently pursuing a PhD at The University of Queensland, focusing on improving the understanding of prognostic factors and reversibility in pediatric bronchiectasis among children and young people.
Dr. Mills values research work grounded in scientific integrity and transparent methodology, which communicates complex ideas clearly and invites a broad audience to think. Medical science is rarely about absolutes; rather, it advances through work that illuminates uncertainty, offers perspective, and contributes meaningfully, regardless of the findings. Ultimately, good academic writing should engage the respiratory science community in thoughtful dialogue and shared progress, while remaining mindful of the human experience and our collective responsibility as contributors to the field.
Dr. Mills believes that maintaining a steady pace while producing thoughtful, high-quality work is undeniably challenging. He is continually refining his approach, recognising that good research and writing take time and that no individual can remain across everything alone. In practice, this involves protecting regular time for structured engagement with the literature through targeted journal alerts and reviews, using digital tools to track emerging evidence, and engaging with conferences and scientific meetings. Remaining open to new and differing perspectives through discussion with research collaborators and clinical colleagues is equally important and often provides insights that no single source can offer.
“Before my medical career, I played Australian rules football, where post-match review was central to improvement—analysing what went well, acknowledging errors, and identifying areas for growth through open discussion with teammates and coaches. That process required managing ego and being open to critique, something many of us find challenging when our work is closely examined. I see strong parallels in academic medicine. Feedback from collaborators, reviewers, and editors can be confronting, but when reframed with a growth mindset, peer review becomes one of the great strengths of the scientific process—helping refine ideas, strengthen methodology, and ultimately ensure we do better for the patients and families we serve,” says Dr. Mills.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
James D. Ross
Dr. James Ross is the President and Chief Scientist for Benchmark Biotech LLC in Portland, Oregon. He holds a doctorate in Physiology and Biophysics from the University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Medicine. He specializes in military and civilian trauma research and has previously held scientific leadership positions within the US Navy and US Air Force. His current focus is on the development of medical devices, drugs, and products that modernize austere trauma management both on and off the battlefield.
Maja Engler
Maja Engler is a senior research assistant for Benchmark Biotech LLC in Portland, Oregon. She is interested in medical device development, specifically for trauma and combat casualty care.
JTD: What is the role of academic writing in science?
Dr. Ross: In my opinion, academic writing is the single most fundamental activity in research and development. A foundation in critical writing dictates not only the sourcing of funding for research but also how we, as an academic community, communicate our works. A significant challenge in this role is publishing negative results or replicating others’ work, both of which are vital to advancing any scientific field. A strong focus on academic writing is requisite to overcome the challenges associated with publishing both positive and negative results.
Maja: Academic writing plays a vital role in furthering our collective scientific knowledge by providing high-quality, peer-reviewed information to the public. Advancing scientific research in all fields is a crucial process.
JTD: Academic writing takes a lot of time and effort. What motivates you to do so?
Dr. Ross: The writing process can be laborious, certainly. My motivation stems from the thrill of discovery and the desire to share our findings with the broader scientific community. I find the dialogue with new and old colleagues, that publications illicit, to be an equally satisfying reward to the writing process. I also keep a nice bag of 100% Kona coffee stored away for special motivation when needed.
Maja: Knowing that I am able to make an important contribution to the scientific field motivates my writing. The hope is that my work will have a positive impact on human health and survival.
JTD: Science advances rapidly. How do you keep your writing current and insightful?
Dr. Ross: I find it challenging in the face of dual administrative and research responsibilities to ensure that our writing is up-to-date with the current literature. With the advent of digital media in publication, the speed at which new information becomes available can be staggering. To address this issue, I make sure to allocate regular time for reading current literature, and to adapt AI tools for monitoring new information and breakthroughs in our fields of study.
Maja: It is important to perform thorough literature searches and engage with the scientific community to ensure up-to-date writing. Research contributions rely on collaboration, effective communication, and idea challenge.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Taizo Goya
Dr. Taizo Goya, a Physical Therapist, is affiliated with the Department of Rehabilitation at the University of the Ryukyus Hospital, Okinawa, Japan. His research areas are Clinical research on exercise-induced oxygen desaturation, respiratory sarcopenia, and respiratory muscle training in patients undergoing thoracic and gastrointestinal surgery and those with chronic respiratory diseases (particularly interstitial lung disease). His recent projects focus on Interventional studies aimed at reducing or improving exercise-induced oxygen desaturation after lung cancer surgery. Observational studies examining the relationships between physical function, including exercise tolerance assessment in interstitial lung disease, and quality-of-life indicators. The development of a predictive model for postoperative pulmonary complications in thoracic surgery using CT-based imaging analysis and clinical indicators, such as exercise-induced oxygen desaturation.
Dr. Goya believes that an essential element of an excellent academic paper is clearly articulating how the work will contribute to the future of its research field. At the same time, he hopes that by the time readers finish the paper, they feel so inspired that they cannot wait to step into their clinical practice the next day.
In Dr. Goya’s view, authors should always maintain curiosity by continually asking clinical questions. It is also important to consider what kind of solutions would truly benefit patients. Furthermore, authors should clearly articulate which missing piece of clinical inquiry their paper aims to address.
“Writing an academic paper is not always enjoyable, as you inevitably face various challenges along the way. However, the moment when a completed paper contributes to the advancement of the research field or helps a physical therapist you have never met who is struggling with a similar problem brings immeasurable joy. Above all, this process broadens your own perspective, and the many ‘Eureka’ moments you experience enable you to provide higher-quality care to the patients in front of you—one of the greatest rewards for a physical therapist. I believe that this, in turn, generates new inspiration and curiosity for future research,” says Dr. Goya.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Wataru Shigeeda
Wataru Shigeeda, MD, PhD, is a thoracic surgeon in the Department of Thoracic Surgery, Iwate Medical University, Japan. He obtained his PhD from the Graduate School of Iwate Medical University in 2018. His clinical and research interests focus on the surgical treatment of thoracic malignancies and thoracic cystic diseases, with particular attention to optimizing surgical techniques and perioperative outcomes. In recent years, his work has emphasized evidence-based strategies to improve safety and reliability in thoracic surgery, including retrospective clinical analyses derived from daily practice. Through clinical research and academic writing, he aims to translate insights from meticulous, experience-based clinical practice in Japan into reproducible knowledge that can be shared with the global thoracic surgery community.
In Dr. Shigeeda’s view, authors should be aware of potential biases inherent in each data source, including selection bias and reporting bias. He believes that careful synthesis sometimes requires the courage to exclude data that do not truly address the research question, rather than forcing heterogeneous evidence into a single conclusion. Instead, it is often more meaningful to acknowledge differences between studies and explain why results may vary. Transparency in methodology and an honest discussion of limitations strengthen the credibility of the synthesis and help readers interpret the findings appropriately.
Dr. Shigeeda believes that disclosure of Conflict of Interest (COI) is essential. As human beings, authors may unconsciously introduce bias into their interpretation of data. One important role of COI disclosure is to make authors themselves aware of potential influences on their judgment. The next step is to provide transparency for readers, enabling them to assess the findings within the necessary context. Research without proper COI disclosure inevitably raises concerns about data credibility, regardless of the quality of the analysis.
Dr. Shigeeda thinks that academic writing enables him to share techniques and knowledge he is proud of with a global audience. Simultaneously, it reflects a mutual learning process: through the contributions of numerous authors, he can integrate valuable ideas and practices developed by others into his own clinical work. What he finds most fascinating is that individual clinical experience, once carefully documented and analysed, can become shared knowledge that benefits the wider medical community.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Kazuki Noda
Kazuki Noda, MD, is a cardiovascular surgeon in the Department of Cardiovascular Surgery at Osaka Metropolitan University. His clinical work focuses primarily on adult cardiac and aortic diseases, and he is actively engaged in advancing surgical care for these conditions. His research interests include the use of large administrative datasets for statistical and outcomes-based investigations, particularly in the field of cardiovascular surgery. In addition, he conducts basic research on atrial fibrillation, with a focus on atrial remodeling. His current projects involve RNA analysis and histological evaluation of atrial tissue to clarify the molecular mechanisms underlying structural and electrical changes in the atrium. By combining clinical experience with data-driven and molecular methods, he aims to enhance the understanding and treatment of cardiac disease.
Dr. Noda believes that academic writing is crucial because it enables researchers and clinicians to communicate new knowledge clearly, structurally, and reliably. Both basic and clinical research must advance together to drive meaningful innovation. In clinical medicine, case studies often serve as the starting point of research. They highlight real clinical problems, generate new questions, and inspire investigations that eventually lead to broader studies. Without academic writing, these observations would remain isolated, and valuable insights could not be shared or expanded.
According to Dr. Noda, a good author must be able to identify meaningful clinical questions and transform them into feasible and well-structured research plans. Clear thinking and accurate interpretation of results are essential, as is the ability to express ideas concisely and objectively. Equally valuable is an openness to constructive feedback. Authors who can accept reviewers’ comments and revise their manuscripts accordingly produce stronger and more reliable work. Integrity, curiosity, and a commitment to improving the quality of one’s writing are qualities that ultimately enhance the impact of scientific communication.
“Balancing clinical duties with research requires careful time management. Prioritizing tasks helps me focus on work that contributes most to long-term goals. I also set milestones a few steps ahead, which helps me work efficiently and maintain direction even during busy periods. To avoid feeling overwhelmed, I divide writing into small, manageable tasks such as drafting outlines, revising figures, or editing short sections. This approach allows steady progress despite clinical responsibilities. By keeping a structured schedule and maintaining consistency, I can balance my roles as a clinician and a researcher while continuing to advance my academic work,” says Dr. Noda.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Henrique Kim
Dr. Henrique Jin Son Kim completed his medical degree in Curitiba (2014–2019) and his Internal Medicine residency at Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná (PUC-PR) from 2021 to 2023. He is currently a Medical Oncology fellow at A.C. Camargo Cancer Center (2024–present), where he also serves as Deputy Chief Fellow/Resident (2025–present). He is an active member of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO), and previously held Chief and Deputy Chief Resident roles during his Internal Medicine training. His research interests include neuroendocrine tumors, gastrointestinal malignancies, and lung cancer. He co-authored a 2025 publication in Cancer Treatment Reviews on induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. He has presented internationally at ELCC 2025 (Paris) on datopotamab deruxtecan in advanced non-small cell lung cancer and at ESMO GI 2025 (Barcelona) on transarterial chemoembolization with or without anti–PD-1/PD-L1 therapy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. He currently has two ongoing research projects focused on neuroendocrine tumors.
Dr. Kim highlights that academic writing is vital, as it is the primary means through which scientific knowledge is communicated, assessed, and preserved. Research only becomes meaningful when it can be clearly shared, understood, and reproduced by others. Through academic writing, individual findings contribute to collective progress. Additionally, writing promotes rigor and accountability. It requires researchers to logically structure arguments, justify methodologies, acknowledge limitations, and situate results within the existing literature. In medicine and science, well-written academic work directly influences clinical practice, guidelines, and future research. Without strong academic writing, even high-quality research may fail to achieve impact or credibility.
In Dr. Kim’s view, critical academic writing goes beyond description and actively engages with evidence. It involves questioning assumptions, comparing findings across studies, and analyzing both strengths and limitations of methods and results. Rather than simply reporting what is known, critical writing explores why results differ and what they truly mean. Authors should avoid over-generalization, be transparent about uncertainty, and clearly distinguish evidence from interpretation. Reading the literature critically, incorporating peer review, and revising multiple drafts are also essential steps. Lastly, critical writing reflects intellectual honesty and a deep understanding of the subject.
“The first experience of writing a scientific paper can be somewhat frustrating, mainly because we tend to be perfectionists. This often makes the process slower, especially when the results differ from our initial expectations. However, it is precisely during these challenges that we learn that academic writing is not about confirming assumptions, but about developing critical thinking and maintaining intellectual honesty. Another important lesson is the value we begin to place on study methodology. It is through careful evaluation of methods that we learn to distinguish high-quality research from weaker studies. This experience ultimately shapes how we read, write, and judge scientific literature more critically,” says Dr. Kim.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Christopher Kloth
Dr. Christopher Kloth is a radiology physician and research assistant at the Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology at Ulm University Medical Center (Germany). His research focuses on lung imaging, including X-ray and computed tomography. He has published multiple studies on infectious lung imaging, as well as in relation to pulmonary fibrosis, functional lung imaging, artificial intelligence solutions, and post-processing. He is a radiology specialist who currently works in both outpatient clinical practice and research at the university hospital.
Dr. Kloth thinks that accurate clinical imaging is irreplaceable in everyday life. In general, radiology has an unprecedented impact on patient management and patient survival. This must also be reflected in the same precision and dedication in scientific work and academic writing. In daily life, the clinical setting is often complex, and optimizing resources and time is necessary. The challenge here is to unite clinical work and scientific activity; however, clinical experience can be systematically documented through academic writing. This can stimulate the exchange of knowledge and allow one to share their own experiences with the scientific community.
“Scientific writing and clinical work go hand in hand and must constantly complement each other. Only those who dedicate themselves to both can succeed in each other. Finding a successful balance here is what distinguishes a good physician. Ultimately, this is always a benefit for the patient,” says Dr. Kloth.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Noriko Hayama
Noriko Hayama is a Japanese pulmonologist. After graduating from the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences at the Science University of Tokyo, she worked in pharmaceutical sales before earning her medical degree from the Faculty of Medicine at Kyorin University. She has extensive experience in the diagnosis and treatment of internal medicine conditions, endobronchial ultrasound-guided procedures, and comprehensive respiratory care, including lung cancer. Following her residency at a hospital in Tokyo, she served as a respiratory physician at several medical institutions in the greater Tokyo area. Currently, she is temporarily away from clinical practice to conduct research abroad. She is also a research fellow in the Department of Respiratory Medicine at Juntendo University.
Dr. Hayama believes that good writing should be clear and easily understood by non-specialists. The discussion section should be logically organized, and the methods should be described appropriately. She emphasizes the importance of conducting a thorough literature review beforehand, maintaining objectivity in writing, and avoiding a subjective or self-centered perspective.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Yizhan Guo
Dr. Yizhan Guo is currently an Integrated Cardiothoracic Surgery resident at the University of Pittsburgh in the United States. He has a keen interest in translational surgical research related to clinical outcomes, animal models, immunology, and innovative technology, particularly in heart and lung transplantation.
In Dr. Guo’s view, good writing needs to be designed and carried out rigorously, with data documented and organized appropriately. The visualization of data must be clear and simple for the readers. The discussion should involve a thorough review of the literature, and the conclusion should be precise and not overstated.
Dr. Guo believes that authors of biomedical research papers should consider their potential readers. It is essential to convey messages or new knowledge from the study to the appropriate audience. Authors often produce a significant amount of data, but it is essential to select and organize this information effectively. This ensures that the main message of the article is clear to both readers who are already familiar with the topic and those who are just starting to develop an interest in it. It is also critical to recognize the defects of their study and state them clearly in the discussion so that readers are not misled.
“JTD is read by a global audience of clinicians, including pulmonologists and cardiothoracic surgeons. This study is highly clinically relevant, and through this paper, I hope to advocate for a rigorous re-evaluation of using donors with cancer for organ donation, especially lungs, in clinical centers across the world. JTD is the correct platform to spread the message,” says Dr. Guo.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Carolina Cáfaro
Carolina Cáfaro, MD, is a physician specialized in Internal Medicine and Intensive Care Medicine. She is an intensivist working in the Intensive Care Unit at Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein in São Paulo, Brazil, and she is also a member of the Einstein Telemedicine team. She is currently a PhD candidate at Amsterdam UMC, where her research focuses on tracheostomy practice.
Dr. Cáfaro believes that academic writing is a crucial foundation of scientific progress, facilitating the clear dissemination of evidence and the ongoing evolution of clinical practice. To give new insights into writing, maintaining a habit of continuous learning is essential to her. Seeking guidance from good mentors is also fundamental.
“I am committed to providing patients with the best possible care through evidence-based practice, even though scientific work can be challenging and time-consuming, particularly within the already intense routine of the ICU,” says Dr. Cáfaro.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Felicia S. W. Teo
Dr. Felicia Teo is a dual-accredited physician specializing in Respiratory and Intensive Care Medicine, based at The Lung Clinic in Mount Elizabeth Medical Centre, Singapore. She is also a visiting consultant at the National University Hospital in Singapore. Her research interest is in Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD), where she received subspecialty training at the Royal Brompton Hospital, London, after which she helped establish the Interstitial Lung Disease Service at the National University Hospital, working closely with specialty physicians in respiratory medicine, rheumatology, haemato-oncology and transplant medicine. She is actively participating in clinical trials and serves as a site investigator for the national ILD-Sing registry, which aims to enhance understanding of local and Asian ILD epidemiology. She continues to contribute to ILD education both locally and within the Asia-Pacific region as a speaker and serves as a reviewer for many local and international journals.
JTD: What role does academic writing play in science?
Dr. Teo: Often, in clinical practice, we may have already made certain observations about our patients, their disease processes or outcomes. However, we need to objectively prove them, then convey our observations to a larger community through research and academic writing. Academic writing involves a level of disciplined thinking in structuring one’s scientific ideas, and literary skills to convey our thoughts in a way which is understandable and convincing to others.
JTD: Is it important for authors to follow reporting guidelines (e.g. STROBE, CONSORT, and PRISMA) when preparing manuscripts?
Dr. Teo: I think reporting guidelines are a very useful reminder to authors to structure their manuscripts in a way which is organized and systematic! Kudos to JTD for putting these forth during manuscript preparation. However, a detailed checkbox may not always be necessary for experienced authors.
JTD: Can you share tips on selecting the appropriate evidence for synthesis and analysis? What do authors have to bear in mind during the process?
Dr. Teo: In-depth knowledge of the subject matter is crucial. This expertise is gained through specialized training, substantial clinical practice with appropriate case volume and mix, and a comprehensive review of relevant literature. When conducting a literature review and synthesizing evidence, authors must consider the contextual issues relevant to their research. This means that despite proven evidence, there may exist local social, cultural and practice-related nuances in every research center which may not always be reproducible in other healthcare settings. It is important to be aware of this for scientific objectivity.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Francesco Donati
Dr. Francesco Donati is a Pediatric Surgery resident at the University of Genoa, currently training at the Giannina Gaslini Children’s Hospital in Genoa, Italy. During his residency, he also spent part of his training in pediatric cardiac surgery, an experience that further strengthened his interest in thoracic diseases and complex intrathoracic anatomy. His primary clinical and research focus is pediatric thoracic surgery, particularly concerning esophageal atresia, thoracic wall deformities, and lung and tracheal surgery in children. At Gaslini, he works under the mentorship of Prof. Mattioli and Prof. Torre, whose expertise has played a key role in his professional development. He has also completed a formative training period with Drs. Martinez Ferro, Bellia Munzon, Toselli and Cocciaglia at Garrahan, Elizalde Children’s Hospitals, Clinica Mi Pectus, gaining valuable international experience in pediatric thoracic and tracheal surgery.
In Dr. Donati’s view, a good academic paper is, first of all, a reproducible study, as reproducibility represents the true strength and reliability of scientific research. A solid methodology and transparent reporting allow results to be verified and applied by other researchers and clinicians. Beyond this, a good academic paper should contribute meaningfully to the field: it should improve the understanding of a disease, refine or modify existing surgical techniques, or introduce new concepts that advance clinical practice. Ultimately, high-quality academic work is research that not only answers a question clearly but also has the potential to influence how we think about a pathology and how we treat our patients.
To avoid bias in scientific writing, Dr. Donati stresses that it is essential to rely on a rigorous and well-structured methodology. A key element is the involvement of a statistician from the early stages of the study, as medical statistics should actively contribute to both the design and the execution of high-quality scientific research. Appropriate study planning, correct data analysis, and transparent reporting are fundamental to minimizing bias and ensuring that conclusions are robust, reliable, and clinically meaningful.
“Curiosity is the true engine of scientific research, guiding us to explore and better understand complex questions in writing. Equally important is the desire to make a positive impact—whether by improving knowledge of a disease, refining treatments, or enhancing patient care. To fellow academic writers dedicating themselves to advancing science, I would say to focus on contributing, step by step, to the understanding and care of patients. Even small insights can make a meaningful difference over time,” says Dr. Donati.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Mitsuharu Hosono
Dr. Mitsuharu Hosono is a Professor at the Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Nara Medical University. His research areas are surgeries for ischemic heart disease and heart valve disease. His recent projects focus on minimally invasive cardiac surgery and valve repair procedures. He has a great interest in innovation in surgical procedures and operative strategies.
Dr. Hosono believes that every result from scientific research can be a significant step forward in any field, regardless of whether the paper is published in a prestigious journal. He emphasizes that researchers should carefully consider the data and findings of their study when preparing to write.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Akio Sakamoto
Akio Sakamoto, MD, PhD, is the Chief of the Bone and Soft Tissue Tumor Service in the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at Kyoto University. He has over 20 years of experience in the multidisciplinary management of musculoskeletal tumors, treating not only extremity tumors but also chest wall tumors in close collaboration with thoracic surgeons. His clinical work focuses on optimizing surgical resection and reconstruction while preserving function. His recent research interests include clinical outcome evaluation in bone and soft tissue tumors and functional assessment after chest wall tumor resection, particularly the impact of chest wall defects and reconstruction on thoracic function and postoperative recovery.
Dr. Sakamoto places a high value on research papers that can be applied to daily clinical practice, particularly those focusing on practical surgical techniques, rather than solely on large-scale studies. He believes that a key skill for authors is the ability to identify unanswered questions in everyday clinical settings and transform them into well-structured, feasible research projects.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Julian Brouillette
Dr. Julian Brouillette is a specialist in Emergency Medicine in Belgium, currently practicing in Charleroi. His current research focuses on reducing costs and resource utilization in Belgian emergency departments while maintaining the same high standard of patient care. This work is motivated by the recognition that climate change is a global health threat and that reducing waste in emergency care represents a concrete and meaningful contribution to more sustainable healthcare systems.
Dr. Brouillette points out that a good academic paper should include the following elements:
- A clear primary objective: secondary outcomes can add value, but they inherently increase the risk of bias and should remain clearly subordinate to the main research question.
- A transparent identification of limitations: every study has weaknesses, and explicitly acknowledging them strengthens the credibility and overall validity of the work.
- Credible and well-grounded interpretation: conclusions should be clearly supported by the data, with careful consideration of causality, alternative explanations, and potential pitfalls. Solid medical reasoning should prevail over appealing but oversimplified messages.
Dr. Brouillette is motivated to create a more sustainable healthcare system, advance knowledge within the scientific community to support informed decision-making, and assist fellow clinicians in their daily practice of saving lives.
Lastly, Dr. Brouillette would like to say a few words to all researchers, “Thank you for your time, dedication, and passion. The commitment you bring to the medical field, and your drive to push everyone further play a vital role in saving lives. Your struggles are real, and at times your accomplishments may seem insignificant; yet you are an essential part of the vast network of knowledge that benefits us all.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Peter M. Small
Dr. Peter M. Small was a Doctor at UCSF at the dawn of the AIDS epidemic, a clinical investigator at Stanford during the resurgence of TB in the US, and then built and ran the TB program for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. He is currently the CMO of Hyfe, a company that utilizes acoustic AI to continually and accurately monitor cough to transform the understanding and treatment.
Dr. Small emphasizes that effective academic writing should include a clear research question and thorough analysis, all structured according to the standard format: Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion. However, the most crucial and challenging aspect is that the work must offer novel insights into an important question. Without this, it risks being overlooked and uncited, much like the majority of academic papers.
Dr. Small points out that a skilled author will weave a compelling narrative within the somewhat confining structure. This narrative includes the problem, the approach to solving it, and the results, all stylistically layered like a mathematical proof.
“It is important to be aware of what others in your field are writing, but not to get too distracted by it. I have had very senior scientists tell me that I need not bother submitting a manuscript since they had just submitted the same to Science, only to find out they had done no such thing. Regardless of what you are hearing, stay focused on turning your data into a story and getting it submitted,” says Dr. Small.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Toshio Shiotani
Dr. Toshio Shiotani is a thoracic surgeon affiliated with Kagawa Prefecture Central Hospital in Japan. He obtained his Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in Medicine from Okayama University, where his doctoral research focused on lung transplantation. He received comprehensive training in general and thoracic surgery and has developed a strong clinical and academic interest in lung cancer, empyema, pneumothorax, and minimally invasive thoracic surgery. His recent research focuses on optimizing surgical strategies and perioperative management for acute empyema or pneumothorax, including the use of prognostic scoring systems and nutritional assessment to guide treatment decisions. He has also been involved in studies on novel surgical techniques and postoperative outcomes in thoracic surgery. Through clinical research, he aims to bridge daily clinical practice with evidence-based decision-making and to provide practical insights applicable to real-world thoracic surgical settings.
In Dr. Shiotani’s view, one of the most common difficulties in academic writing is clearly conveying the novelty and clinical significance of the research. Authors are often deeply familiar with their own data, which can make it challenging to present the key message in a way that is easily understood by readers outside their immediate specialty. One challenge is maintaining a clear structure and concise narrative, especially when working with complex clinical data. Achieving a balance between scientific rigor and readability demands multiple revisions and critical self-reflection. Additionally, for non-native English speakers, language can be a barrier, particularly when subtle nuances and precise expressions are necessary.
Dr. Shiotani tries to allocate time for writing by integrating research activities into daily clinical practice, such as prospectively organizing data and clarifying research questions during routine case discussions. Rather than waiting for long, uninterrupted periods, he often writes in short, focused sessions, even if only 20–30 minutes at a time. Setting small, achievable goals—such as completing one paragraph or revising one section—helps maintain continuity. Collaboration with co-authors is also essential, as sharing responsibilities makes the process more efficient and sustainable.
Additionally, Dr. Shiotani advocates the use of reporting guidelines such as STROBE, CONSORT, and CARE. These guidelines help ensure transparency, completeness, and reproducibility, which are fundamental to high-quality clinical research. To him, reporting guidelines also function as a practical checklist, reducing the risk of missing important methodological details. Moreover, adherence to these standards facilitates peer review and enhances readers’ confidence in the validity of the findings. Ultimately, reporting guidelines contribute to improving the overall credibility and impact of published research.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Fahim Kanani
Dr. Fahim Kanani is a Transplantation Surgery Fellow at Rabin Medical Center (Beilinson Campus) and an attending surgeon at Wolfson Medical Center. He is currently a candidate for an MHA and MPH at Tel Aviv University. His academic interests focus on kidney and liver transplantation, hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery, transplant oncology, minimally invasive surgery, and outcomes-based surgical innovation. His recent work centers on improving transplant outcomes, expanding donor utilization, advancing surgical techniques, and conducting high-quality clinical research and meta-analyses, with a growing interest in data-driven and AI-supported decision-making in surgery. He actively collaborates in national and international research initiatives and has recently been awarded a competitive research grant of 330,000 NIS to support innovation in abdominal wall reconstruction.
Dr. Kanani takes the view that a high-quality academic paper begins with a clearly defined and clinically relevant research question. This should be supported by a robust and transparent methodology, accurate data collection, and appropriate statistical analysis. Scientific integrity, honesty in reporting results, and acknowledgment of limitations are essential. In addition, a strong paper should contribute meaningful insight to existing literature and be written in a clear, structured, and concise manner that allows readers to easily understand and apply the findings in clinical or scientific practice.
To Dr. Kanani’s mind, authors should remain committed to rigorous scientific standards throughout the preparation of a manuscript, including adherence to ethical principles, reporting guidelines, and methodological transparency. Academic writing requires persistence, continuous effort, and strong determination, as high-quality research often involves multiple revisions and constructive criticism. Equally important is the guidance of an experienced mentor, whose scientific insight, critical thinking, and support play a central role in shaping sound research and successful publication.
“In February 2024, I had no publications or first authorship after seven years of hard work. Despite being in a strong clinical role and performing over 3,000 surgeries during my residency, I lacked the right mentorship. Leaving my comfort zone was difficult because I feared losing progress. However, my mentor, Professor Pietro Majno, advised me, ‘One day without academia, you will not be able to use your good hands.’ That advice changed my path. I committed to academic growth, often working over 16 hours a day. With a true mentor’s guidance, I learned to think scientifically. With my team’s support, I wrote over 60 works in one year, with more than 50 published online. My message is clear: find a true mentor. Good mentorship transforms your academic view and shapes you as a doctor and person. When research is guided well, it becomes a rewarding journey,” says Dr. Kanani.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Kheira Hireche
Kheira Hireche is a thoracic-vascular surgeon and academic researcher with affiliations in thoracic surgery and clinical research at CHU Montpellier in France. Her work focuses on lung cancer surgery, with particular interest in minimally invasive techniques, perioperative management, and complex pulmonary resections, including sleeve lobectomy and vascular reconstruction. She is actively involved in both clinical and translational research and has contributed to several peer-reviewed publications. Her recent projects include randomized clinical trials and outcome-based studies evaluating surgical techniques, postoperative recovery, and long-term oncological results. She is currently completing a PhD thesis structured as a thesis by publication, integrating experimental, clinical, and functional research components.
In Dr. Hireche’s view, a good academic paper is built on a clear and relevant research question, a robust and transparent methodology, and rigorous data analysis. Clarity of writing and logical structure are essential to allow readers to understand and critically appraise the work. Results should be presented honestly and concisely, without overstating conclusions. High-quality academic research most often originates from a real problem encountered in daily clinical practice, particularly in surgery, where decision-making has a direct impact on patient outcomes. It is driven by a well-defined clinical question, which can then be explored progressively, starting with experimental studies to investigate underlying mechanisms, and subsequently extending to clinical studies and patient cohorts to assess outcomes, safety, and effectiveness of therapeutic strategies. Finally, a strong discussion that places the findings in the context of existing literature and acknowledges the limitations of the study is essential to ensure the credibility and relevance of the scientific work.
Dr. Hireche asserts that an author's essential skills include critical thinking, methodological rigor, and the ability to synthesize complex information. Writing skills are fundamental, particularly the ability to communicate ideas clearly and precisely. Perseverance and attention to detail are also essential, as academic writing often requires multiple revisions and responses to peer review. Collaboration and openness to feedback greatly enhance the quality of scientific work.
“One recurring experience in academic writing is realizing that unexpected or negative results can be as informative as positive ones. Some of the most rewarding publications stemmed from studies where the initial hypothesis was not confirmed, leading to deeper analysis and more meaningful conclusions. These experiences reinforced the importance of scientific integrity and curiosity over confirmation of preconceived ideas,” says Dr. Hireche.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Darren Turner
Dr. Darren Turner obtained his medical degree from the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. During medical school, he studied large animal models of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction and novel stem cell therapeutics, bridging his early science background to his current cardiothoracic focus. He is currently a general surgery resident at the University of Cincinnati Medical Center. During residency training, he sought to pursue his research interests in cardiothoracic surgery as a postdoctoral research fellow at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center in the division of Cardiothoracic Surgery. His research interests span clinical outcomes research in congenital heart surgery, pediatric cardiac and lung transplantation, and translational research related to mechanical circulatory support and tissue engineering.
Dr. Turner believes that academic writing is a skill that cannot be overemphasized in science. Sharing ideas and theories among peers is essential for scientific advancement, as it ensures reproducibility and progress in a field. Peer review, integral to the academic writing process, is also crucial to maintaining scientific integrity. Furthermore, collaborative writing between mentor and mentee is a form of scientific education and knowledge transfer, providing unique opportunities for mentorship and camaraderie.
According to Dr. Turner, time management is a skill that can be exercised. For him personally, the Pomodoro technique is quite helpful in optimizing productivity in a short span of time. He treats writing as a daily habit that he approaches in small increments, rather than awaiting motivation before writing. The demanding and often unpredictable schedules that authors have require the purposeful time management almost down to the hour of the day.
In Dr. Turner’s view, the IRB system was largely a response to serious ethical violations in research history. IRBs, to the best of their abilities, maintain the ethical standards of research and ensure that not only is data used as intended, but also that research participants or vulnerable populations do not have their identity or autonomy compromised. Omission of the process could result in morally dubious research and foster distrust between the community, institution, and investigators.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Potjanee Korrungruang
Dr. Potjanee Korrungruang graduated in Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine from the Faculty of Medicine at Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand. She currently works as an Interventional Pulmonologist in the Division of Pulmonary Medicine at Rajavithi Hospital in Thailand. She also works as an academic clinician at Rangsit University's College of Medicine in Thailand. Her research focuses on interventional pulmonology, particularly EBUS-TBNA, therapeutic bronchoscopy (including airway stenting, airway dilation, and endobronchial valve placement), as well as clinical epidemiology.
According to Dr. Korrungruang, a successful research study starts with a clear and relevant question that tackles uncertainties in current knowledge. It involves careful planning, suitable methodology, logical analysis, and transparent, data-driven conclusions. This approach is essential for advancing medical knowledge and facilitating its broad application in practice.
Dr. Korrungruang believes that keeping academic writing current involves continuous engagement with recent literature and integrating new evidence with real-world clinical experience. She critically appraises emerging studies to identify knowledge gaps and generate new insights for the field.
Dr. Korrungruang emphasizes that conducting research provides an opportunity for systematic planning and allows one to monitor progress toward achieving specific goals. Constructive questions and feedback from experts can help refine the work, improve its quality, and contribute to a more meaningful research experience.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Ritesh Agarwal
Dr. Ritesh Agarwal is a Professor in the Department of Pulmonary Medicine at the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India. His primary research interest is allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis (ABPA), where he has made seminal contributions to diagnosis, epidemiology, and management. He has authored over 700 peer-reviewed publications and numerous book chapters in national and international textbooks. He is the recipient of the Shanti Swarup Bhatnagar Award (2020), one of India’s highest scientific honors, for his work on ABPA. He is a Fellow of several prestigious professional bodies, including the American College of Chest Physicians, the American College of Physicians, the APSR, the Asian Pacific Society of Respirology, the Indian Chest Society, and the Royal College of Physicians of Glasgow.
According to Dr. Agarwal, academic writing presents several recurring challenges. One of the most common is organizing complex scientific ideas into a coherent and logically flowing narrative while adhering to a structured format. Authors often struggle to balance comprehensiveness with brevity, leading to unnecessary detail that obscures key messages. Language precision, particularly for non-native English speakers, is another major hurdle. Maintaining objectivity while presenting persuasive arguments requires discipline, as does avoiding overinterpretation of results. Proper citation management and safeguarding against inadvertent plagiarism demand meticulous attention. Time constraints, especially when balancing clinical or research responsibilities, further complicate the process. Additionally, tailoring manuscripts to specific journal scopes and formats is essential but often underestimated. Finally, responding constructively to peer-review feedback and distinguishing valid critique from misunderstanding requires experience and patience. These challenges are best overcome through sustained practice, careful reading, and mentorship.
Dr. Agarwal asserts that effective evidence synthesis begins with a clearly defined research question, often structured using frameworks such as PICO. Authors should conduct comprehensive, reproducible literature searches across multiple databases and apply predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria consistently. Emphasis should be placed on study quality rather than quantity, with careful appraisal of methodology, bias, and relevance. During synthesis, authors must remain objective, presenting conflicting evidence when it exists rather than selectively citing supportive studies. Both statistical and clinical significance should be considered when interpreting results. Transparent reporting, guided by reporting guidelines such as PRISMA, enhances credibility and reproducibility. A clear acknowledgment of limitations, both within individual studies and across the overall body of evidence, strengthens rather than weakens the scientific message and fosters trust among readers.
“JTD provides an excellent platform for research in respiratory and critical care medicine. Its wide-ranging scope, encompassing pulmonary medicine, thoracic surgery, and intensive care, supports interdisciplinary work, particularly for complex conditions such as allergic bronchopulmonary aspergillosis. The journal is recognized for its rigorous peer-review standards and efficient editorial processing, which promote the timely dissemination of clinically relevant research. Its open-access model, while presenting challenges in some developing countries, nonetheless provides broad global visibility, which is especially important for diseases that remain underrecognized in many regions. Furthermore, the JTD accommodates a diverse range of article types, from original research to educational reviews, enabling the sharing of comprehensive knowledge. The journal’s focus on clinically meaningful and educational content aligns closely with efforts worldwide to improve disease awareness, diagnosis, and management, making it a valuable resource for advancing respiratory medicine,” says Dr. Agarwal.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Bo-Mi Gil
Dr. Bo-Mi Gil is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Radiology at Bucheon St. Mary’s Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Republic of Korea. She is a thoracic radiologist whose clinical and research interests focus on thoracic imaging, lung cancer screening, and the application of artificial intelligence in medical imaging. Her research focuses on imaging biomarkers, deep learning image analysis, and AI-driven image synthesis techniques that enhance diagnostic accuracy and aid clinical decision-making in thoracic diseases. She has participated in multiple studies on lung cancer imaging, interstitial lung disease, and CT-based imaging analysis. She aims to bridge clinical radiology and emerging technologies to improve patient care and advance thoracic imaging research.
According to Dr. Gil, a good academic paper should address a clinically meaningful question and provide clear, reproducible evidence to support its conclusions. In medical research, it is important that the study design is appropriate and that the results are presented transparently and interpreted carefully. At the same time, the findings should have practical relevance to clinical practice. Ultimately, a good paper should contribute new knowledge to the field while remaining understandable and useful for both researchers and clinicians.
Dr. Gil believes that authors should prioritize both scientific rigor and clarity in their writing. A well-designed study with appropriate statistical analysis is essential, but it is equally important to communicate the findings clearly and logically. Authors should also consider the clinical relevance of their work and ensure that their conclusions are supported by the data. Careful organization, precise language, and transparent reporting of limitations help readers better understand and trust the results.
“Academic writing is an important way to share clinical experience and contribute to improving patient care. In radiology, imaging technologies and artificial intelligence are rapidly evolving, and research helps translate these advances into clinical practice. Publishing research allows us to share new findings with the broader medical community and encourages collaboration across different specialties. Knowing that our work may ultimately help clinicians make better decisions for patients is a strong motivation for me to continue conducting research and writing,” says Dr. Gil.
(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)
Shinji Sasada
Dr. Shinji Sasada, M.D., Ph.D., is a Pulmonologist in the Department of Respiratory Medicine at The Fraternity Memorial Hospital, Tokyo. He graduated from Kawasaki Medical School in 1996 and has built an extensive career spanning over two decades, with positions at Osaka Prefectural Medical Center for Respiratory and Allergic Diseases, National Cancer Center Hospital, and Tokyo Saiseikai Central Hospital. He has received international recognition for his contributions to respiratory endoscopy, including the Young Investigator's Award at the 12th World Conference on Lung Cancer (2007) for his development of pleural biopsy techniques, and the Award at the 14th World Congress for Bronchology (2006) for developing a novel biopsy device for diagnosing peripheral pulmonary lesions. His current research focuses on the development of innovative biopsy devices and optimizing their application in clinical practice.
According to Dr. Sasada, building a clear argumentative flow, adequately supporting claims, and maintaining coherence throughout a paper are among the most challenging aspects of academic writing. Beyond the writing itself, many students also struggle with managing their time effectively — balancing the demands of research, drafting, and revision while keeping up with deadlines. For non-native speakers, an additional hurdle comes in the form of limited familiarity with grammar, academic conventions, and discipline-specific expressions.
To present a well-rounded argument, Dr. Sasada believes that it is important to draw on evidence from a variety of perspectives — including those that support, challenge, or take a neutral stance on your claim. At the same time, rather than simply accumulating sources, focusing on carefully selecting evidence that is of truly high quality and with meaning strengthens arguments.
(by Sasa Zhu, Masaki Lo)