Over the year, many ACR reviewers have made outstanding contributions to the peer review process. They demonstrated professional effort and enthusiasm in their reviews and provided comments that genuinely help the authors to enhance their work.
Hereby, we would like to highlight some of our outstanding reviewers, with a brief interview of their thoughts and insights as a reviewer. Allow us to express our heartfelt gratitude for their tremendous effort and valuable contributions to the scientific process.
February, 2021
Deepak Khatri, Wyckoff Heights Medical Center, USA
March, 2021
Kazuhito Suzuki, The Jikei University Kashiwa Hospital, Japan
July, 2021
Theresa V Strong, Foundation for Prader-Willi Research (FPWR), Walnut, USA
February, 2021
Deepak Khatri
Dr. Khatri is an Attending Neurosurgeon at Wyckoff Heights Medical Center, Brooklyn, USA. He completed his medical degree from Kasturba Medical College, India. He developed special interest in surgery for brain tumors during his Neurosurgical training at Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, India and pursued a Neurosurgical Oncology fellowship after residency. He completed further fellowship training in Neurosurgical Oncology, Skull base and Cerebrovascular Neurosurgery learning the tenets of complex cranial neurosurgical cases and brain tumours at Lenox Hill Hospital, New York.
His academic interests include treatment of tumors and vascular diseases affecting the brain and spinal cord. Dr. Khatri reviews clinical studies for several neurosurgery journals. He has written several book chapters on surgery for brain tumors and spine pathologies. He has extensively published clinical studies focused on various treatment options and quality of life in glioma patients, tumors of the insular region, endoscopic skull base procedures for tumors and CSF rhinorrhea, surgery for craniovertebral junction anomalies, degenerative spine diseases and clinical outcomes of rare neurosurgical diseases.
To Dr. Khatri, peer review forms an important pillar of clinical research and academics in the era of modern medicine. It ensures the quality of research through unbiased critical reviews by the experts in the field and often helps to improve the research methodology and quality of manuscript.
In Dr. Khatri’s opinion, it is very important for reviewers to stay unbiased and take into consideration all the strengths and weaknesses of the article. A “constructive review” often provides a summary of study limitations and errors in the manuscript along with possible solutions to rectify them in order to improve the study, whereas a few-liner criticism of the manuscript offering no help is a “destructive review” which discourages the research.
When asked what drives him to keep peer reviewing, Dr. Khatri says, “Reviewing unpublished research helps me to stay updated with new information regarding the areas of my interest. It boosts my clinical knowledge and strengthen my research skills as well.”
(By Brad Li, Eunice X. Xu)
March, 2021
Kazuhito Suzuki
Dr. Kazuhito Suzuki currently serves at the Division of Clinical Oncology and Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, The Jikei University Kashiwa Hospital, Japan.
On peer review, Dr. Suzuki says, “Peer review plays an important role in leading to good quality of manuscripts. To be a good reviewer, one should not only have logical view, but also fairness for science. I never feel bored doing peer review. On the contrary, it is interesting if both reviewers and authors could share their consideration and interest. I believe reviewers should always view from the perspective of authors.”
(By Brad Li, Eunice X. Xu)
July, 2021
Theresa V Strong
Dr. Theresa Strong, PhD, is a Director of Research Programs at the Foundation for Prader-Willi Research (FPWR, www.fpwr.org), a non-profit organization that supports research to advance the understanding and treatment of the rare neurodevelopmental disorder Prader-Willi syndrome (PWS) in Walnut, USA. To learn more about Dr. Strong, you may check out her profile and work on Linkedin.
Dr. Strong thinks that peer review helps accelerate research by ensuring that research findings that are shared in the literature are scientifically sound and impactful. It is an essential component of shaping papers that move the field forward in a meaningful way. She suggests that a robust peer review system should provide constructive input into the research process within a reasonable time frame. It can help identify flaws in experimental design and interpretation, ultimately improving the quality of the final publication.
Speaking of Dr. Stong’s motivation as a reviewer, she says, “Throughout my career, I have benefitted from the input of thoughtful peer reviewers. Their perspective often serves to improve the quality of manuscripts I have reviewed, and that motivates me to try to do the same.” She believes that her goal as a peer reviewer is to help authors think through if their evidence supports their hypothesis and the technical limitations that need to be considered and effectively communicate their findings to potential readers. She also enjoys learning about the research that others are doing.
From a reviewer’s perspective, Dr. Strong claims that following the reporting guidelines such as CONSORT, CARE, and STARD assures consistency across the scientific literature and make it easier to compare studies. As a result, authors who follow these guidelines when conducting research enables science to move forward more efficiently.
(By Vicky Wong, Brad Li, Eunice X. Xu)
