In 2025, many ACR authors make outstanding contributions 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 perspective and insightful view as authors.

Outstanding Authors (2025)

Mina Rismani, Wellstar Medical College of Georgia Health, USA

Adonia Eskandari, UCLA Santa Monica Medical Center, USA

Hiroshi Nomura, Nomura Orthopaedic Clinic, Japan

Chaïmaâ Zeroual, Ibn Rochd University Hospital Center, Morocco

Salma Qudrat, Khyber Medical College, Pakistan

Hayabusa Takano, Showa General Hospital, Japan

Naoki Ishimaru, Suwa Central Hospita, Japan

Duy Linh Nguyen, Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Vietnam

Oleksander Chaika, Odesa National Medical University, Ukraine

Raouf Nassar, Soroka University Medical Center, Israel

Nees Marquenie, Erasmus Medical Center, Belgium

Samuel Tholl, The University of British Columbia, Canada

Shahzaib Khan, Advocate South Suburban Hospital, USA

Anis Safura Ramli, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia

Caitlin Bernardo, Medical University of South Carolina, USA

Leila C. Tou, Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine, USA

Grace Gorecki, Allegheny Health Network, USA

Masanori Okada, National Hospital Organization Yamaguchi Ube Medical Center, Japan

Shaikha Almheiri, Danat Alemarat Hospital, UAE

Svjetlana Mikulić, University Clinical Hospital Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovi

Outstanding Author

Mina Rismani

Mina Rismani is a PGY-2 at the Medical College of Georgia internal medicine residency program. She has published research on cardiology and gastroenterology, but her current focus is on studying ultrasound curriculum in academic medicine. She is particularly interested in how this curriculum positively impacts resident education and patient outcomes.

Mina has found the phrase “Medicine is an art” to be very true so far during her training, and she thinks this art becomes especially alive through academic writing. From writing a clinical vignette to discourse on the management of an electrical storm, academic writing has allowed her to express her thoughts on paper, and to have her work validated by the greater academic community is a special experience. Through academic writing, she asserts that every clinician has a different approach to understanding and treating patients, each beautiful in its own way.

Regarding evidence synthesis and analysis, Mina emphasizes that it is always important to allow clinical guidelines published by governing bodies to steer authors toward areas of research that are relevant. This helps mitigate the risk of getting “stuck in the weeds” of some perhaps less clinically relevant topics in research.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Adonia Eskandari

Dr. Adonia Eskandari earned his Bachelor’s degree in Biochemistry from the University of California, Los Angeles, and his Doctor of Pharmacy degree from the University of California, San Francisco. He completed a PGY-1 acute care pharmacy residency at NorthBay Healthcare and a PGY-2 critical care pharmacy residency at the University of California, Davis Medical Center. Currently, he is a critical care pharmacist at UCLA Health, working in a medical/surgical intensive care unit. His research interests include pharmacotherapy in critical care, with a focus on infectious diseases, analgesia and sedation, and glycemic management.

Dr. Eskandari values academic papers that are thorough, well-structured, and rich in clinically relevant details. A well-written publication should not only present findings clearly but also include essential information, such as specific medication doses, administration details, and patient populations studied. He adds that he is often surprised when key details are omitted, as what may seem minor can significantly impact the applicability of research in clinical practice. As someone who is detail-oriented, he appreciates articles that leave no gaps in critical information, ensuring that clinicians can accurately interpret and apply the findings. Precision and clarity are essential in medical literature, and the best papers reflect the same level of diligence and rigor that pharmacists bring to patient care.

In Dr. Eskandari’s opinion, a good author must be patient and adaptable, understanding that the publication process requires multiple revisions and a willingness to refine their work based on feedback. Writing a strong academic paper takes time, and the ability to accept critiques and make adjustments is essential. However, a great author maintains the integrity of their research while adapting to a journal’s formatting and editorial requirements. While compliance with journal guidelines is necessary, the focus should always remain on delivering accurate, well-supported, and clinically meaningful information.

“I chose to publish in AME Case Reports because it was a strong fit for the manuscript my team had been working on a case series exploring the use of a phenobarbital taper regimen to facilitate weaning from continuous sedative infusions. Given the journal’s focus on clinically relevant case reports, it provided an ideal platform to share our findings with a readership interested in real-world applications of pharmacologic strategies. The opportunity to contribute to a journal that values detailed, practical insights in patient care made it the right choice for our publication,” says Dr. Eskandari.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Hiroshi Nomura

Dr. Hiroshi Nomura is an orthopaedic surgeon specializing in spinal surgery and has served as the director of Nomura Orthopaedic Clinic in Yamaguchi, Japan, since 2018. He earned his M.D. from Kurume University in 1996 and his Ph.D. from the Department of Neuropathology, Neurological Institute, Kyushu University in 2002. From 2003 to 2006, he conducted postdoctoral research at the Division of Cellular and Molecular Biology, Toronto Western Research Institute, Toronto, Canada. The first half of his career focused on spinal cord injury research, during which he authored 10 basic science papers. Upon returning to clinical medicine, his interests shifted to minimally invasive spinal surgery, and he notably introduced a novel technique for lumbar spinal stenosis in the Journal of Neurosurgery in 2014. Since 2018, his research focus has shifted toward osteoporosis treatment. He has published 24 English-language medical papers as a first author so far.

ACR: Why do we need academic writing?

Dr. Nomura: Writing academic papers has been essential for my growth. In the early part of my career, I worked in basic medical research. In this field, hypotheses are formulated, experiments are conducted, and results are summarized in papers. Once every year or two, there would be unexpected discoveries that deeply moved me. Academic writing was indispensable for recording and sharing these experiences. In clinical practice, I write original research papers and case reports to document new treatment methods, the pathology of rare conditions, and treatment outcomes—hoping to make even a small contribution to medicine and patient care. This process significantly improved my diagnostic abilities and nurtured my curiosity and inquisitiveness. In short, through writing, I find joy, excitement, and passion in my work.

ACR: What are the qualities an author should possess?

Dr. Nomura: I believe the most important qualities for an academic author are a pure, earnest curiosity about science and the willingness to confront results honestly. Whether it is an experimental or clinical study, the outcomes may contradict your expectations. By accepting the results with integrity and considering their meaning deeply, seemingly unrelated observations can be connected, leading to insights that go far beyond your initial assumptions. This kind of sensitivity is also valuable in clinical settings. For example, in a 2021 case report in AME Case Reports, I described how the mechanism of scapular pain in cervical radiculopathy could be inferred from the pattern of herpes zoster skin lesions. This is one such case where clinical observations and investigative thinking came together.

ACR: The burden of being a doctor is heavy. How do you allocate time to write papers?

Dr. Nomura: For me, writing papers is a source of enjoyment. I think about how to express my ideas clearly, whether the figures and tables are concise and informative, and whether the references effectively support the key points. Solving each of these challenges and producing a well-crafted paper brings me great satisfaction. Of course, life as a doctor is busy, but because I enjoy writing, it naturally becomes a priority. Interestingly, even after spending a great deal of time preparing a manuscript, by the time it is published, I have often already lost interest in its content and moved on to writing the next one. In the end, I simply enjoy the process of writing papers.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Chaïmaâ Zeroual

Dr. Chaïmaâ Zeroual is a resident physician in internal medicine at CHU Ibn Rochd in Casablanca, Morocco. Deeply passionate about the human body and its intricate workings, she dedicates her time to both clinical practice and continuous exploration of medical knowledge. Her focus lies in understanding complex systemic diseases and uncovering connections between pathophysiology and patient care. Outside of her medical responsibilities, she is also a lyrical poet and author of “Le partage, ambigu and les pleurs d’une fleur”. She sees writing as a powerful tool for expression and reflection, weaving her emotional depth into her poetry.

In Dr. Zeroual’s view, academic writing is essential in science because it structures the way authors share discoveries and build upon previous knowledge. It ensures that information is accessible to others, allowing collective progress in research and clinical practice. Through it, scientific findings transcend borders and time.

To stay updated in writing, Dr. Zeroual regularly engages with medical literature, attends conferences, and discusses clinical cases with peers and mentors. She integrates new findings into her reflections and writings, ensuring that her academic contributions are not only relevant but also rooted in real-time medical advancements and patient care experience.

Dr. Zeroual expresses that her motivation stems from a strong desire to understand and share knowledge. Writing helps her clarify her thoughts and contribute significantly to the scientific and medical communities. It is both a personal discipline and a way to leave a trace in the evolving dialogue of science.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Salma Qudrat

Dr. Salma Qudrat recently graduated with an M.B.B.S degree from Khyber Medical College, Pakistan, and is an internal medicine residency applicant in the United States. She started her research journey as a medical student, and she is in the process of learning different areas of research. Her areas of interest are artificial intelligence, gastroenterology, and cancer research. Currently, she is working on projects involving artificial intelligence in medical imaging.

According to Dr. Qudrat, an effective academic paper is well-structured, clearly written, and successfully conveys its findings. To avoid biases in writing, she believes it is important to present balanced perspectives, ensuring a fair representation of differing viewpoints. Arguments should be based on evidence, using proper data to support one’s claims. It is important to recognize the study's limitations, including its flaws and weaknesses. Additionally, peer review is absolutely crucial to catch any potential errors.

“To my fellow academic writers, stay curious and positive! My biggest advice is to identify your strengths within the research process and do your absolute best to maximize them. For me, that strength is writing, so I strive to excel in that area and go the extra mile. In my opinion, remaining passionate about your research is key to success, and yes, teamwork is the way to go,” says Dr. Qudrat.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Hayabusa Takano

Dr. Hayabusa Takano works primarily in clinical practice as an emergency and intensive care physician at Showa General Hospital in Kodaira City, Tokyo, Japan. He has seven years of experience as a physician since graduating from the University of Tokyo. He works mostly in the ICU, but he also engages in Emergency Department work and IVR (Interventional Radiology) procedures. His areas of interest include ECMO and sepsis, and he provides daily care for critically ill patients of all types in the closed ICU. He is looking to focus more on clinical research in the future.

Dr. Takano thinks a good paper helps clinicians solve critical problems for the patients in front of them. For him, research exists to serve the patients they see in clinical practice. To avoid bias, he focuses on listening carefully to his colleagues and mentors. He believes that obtaining diverse perspectives helps researchers identify their biases before they become problematic.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Naoki Ishimaru

Naoki Ishimaru, MD, is a surgeon in the Department of Surgery and the Center for Emergency and General Medicine at Suwa Central Hospital in Chino, Nagano, Japan. His clinical practice focuses on gastrointestinal surgery for cancer and inflammatory diseases, and on emergency care with an emphasis on life-saving abdominal trauma surgery. He emphasizes the importance of careful observations in everyday practice and aims to transform these bedside observations into actionable research and case reports that enhance patient care.

Dr. Ishimaru believes that case reports are ideal for presenting new concepts or techniques. What matters is whether a case teaches something clinically useful and whether at least part of it can be generalized. To keep his writing current, he consistently observes, asks straightforward questions, and verifies the latest evidence to assess plausibility. Sustaining this cycle—observe, question, verify—turns small findings into practical improvements and, eventually, new ideas.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Duy Linh Nguyen

Dr. Duy Linh Nguyen, MD, currently works in the Department of Neurosurgery at Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy. His primary research interests focus on neuro-oncology, brain/spine injuries, and disorders, with particular emphasis on functional outcomes and neuroimaging biomarkers. Recently, he has been investigating the use of advanced MRI techniques, including diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), to guide surgical resection of gliomas in functional areas. He also conducts clinical research on spinal injuries and degenerative spine conditions, focusing on surgical techniques, predictive factors, and patient rehabilitation. His work combines clinical practice, translational research, and teaching to improve patient care through evidence-based neuroscience.

Dr. Nguyen thinks that a good academic paper should have a clear and focused research question, a well-structured methodology, and rigorous data analysis. It must present results transparently and interpret them logically, situating findings within the existing literature. Concise writing, coherence between sections, and clear figures/tables are crucial for readability. Ethical considerations, reproducibility, and proper citation of prior work are also fundamental elements. Finally, a strong discussion should contextualize the results, acknowledge limitations, and propose meaningful implications or future directions.

From Dr. Nguyen’s perspective, essential skills for an academic author include critical thinking, scientific writing, data interpretation, and statistical literacy. Time management and perseverance are important for completing projects and revisions. Effective literature review and synthesis, attention to detail, and the ability to communicate complex ideas clearly to diverse audiences are also crucial. Collaboration skills, openness to peer feedback, and ethical research practices are equally important in maintaining scientific integrity and producing impactful work.

“One memorable experience occurred while writing a case report on bilateral basal ganglia hematomas treated via a minimally invasive technique. The surgical team faced technical challenges navigating both sides, and documenting the procedure accurately required correlating operative notes, imaging, and patient outcomes. Completing the manuscript reminded me of the importance of meticulous observation, teamwork, and perseverance—showing how even small technical details in clinical practice can become a compelling story in academic writing,” says Dr. Nguyen.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Oleksander Chaika

Oleksander Chaika, MD, PhD, is an Associate Professor of Surgery at Odesa National Medical University in Ukraine. He graduated from the same university in 2007 and completed clinical training in urology, endoscopy, oncology, ultrasound diagnostics, pediatric surgery, and oncosurgery. He earned his PhD in Urology in 2016, focusing on reconstructive and minimally invasive techniques. Since 2022, he has also held a Master’s degree in Public Health Management from Odesa Polytechnic National University. His clinical and research interests include endourology, laparoscopic and high-tech surgical treatment of urological tumors, and oncological reconstruction.  He has authored over 25 scientific articles, secured 3 patents, and published 5 textbooks. Additionally, he actively participates in academic mentoring and public health initiatives in Ukraine. Currently, he combines academic work with clinical practice at the Odesa University Hospital and the Department of Minimally Invasive High-Tech Surgery in the Odesa Municipal Hospital No. 1.

Dr. Chaika believes that academic writing is essential in medical science as it converts clinical experiences and research discoveries into structured and verifiable scientific knowledge. Thus, it enables urologists and oncologists to communicate complex data on cancer diagnostics, surgical innovations, and treatment outcomes with precision and clarity. Through peer-reviewed publications, academic writing ensures reproducibility, transparency, and critical evaluation of new techniques such as laparoscopic or robotic prostatectomy, bladder reconstruction, and targeted therapies. Moreover, it facilitates international collaboration, guideline development, and evidence-based practice. For young researchers, mastering academic writing nurtures analytical thinking and ethical integrity in presenting results. Ultimately, it bridges the gap between clinical innovation and global oncology standards, ensuring continuous progress in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of urological malignancies and other pertinent diseases.

In Dr. Chaika’s opinion, sharing data is essential for the integrity and advancement of modern science. In oncology, where therapeutic decisions and survival outcomes depend on precise metrics, shared datasets enable validation, meta-analysis, and the discovery of patterns that a single study cannot reveal. Transparency transforms isolated research into collective progress — it allows others to reproduce results, refine methodologies, and develop predictive models for patient care. Data sharing also fosters trust between scientists and the public, demonstrating accountability and openness in handling sensitive medical information. While confidentiality and ethical considerations remain vital, controlled data accessibility ensures that knowledge serves humanity, not individual ownership. In essence, open data magnifies the impact of every experiment and turns information into innovation.

According to Dr. Chaika, selecting evidence for synthesis in academic writing is like navigating in an open sea — the scholar must know both the stars of truth and the currents of bias. In oncourology, where every statistic may carry a human story, evidence must be chosen for its reliability, relevance, and reproducibility. Systematic databases, peer-reviewed trials, and meta-analyses form the solid ground beneath the waves. To him, authors should resist the temptation of convenience—using unverified data or anecdotal success—and instead, find a balance between quantitative rigor and clinical intuition. “To write well is to think ethically: words shape perception, and perception directs care. ‘Open world, open mind’ means reading beyond borders, questioning hierarchies of evidence, and letting data, not ego, speak. In science, words are scalpel blades — precise, sharp, and accountable,” adds he.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Raouf Nassar

Dr. Raouf Nassar is a pediatric consultant and pediatric gastroenterology consultant at Bnai Zion Medical Center, Haifa, Israel. He finished his medical studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He completed his pediatric residency at Saban Children’s Hospital, Soroka University Medical Center, Beer Sheva, followed by a pediatric gastroenterology, hepatology, and nutrition fellowship at Schneider Children’s Medical Center of Israel and Saban Children’s Hospital, Soroka University Medical Center. He also completed advanced clinical fellowships in pediatric hepatology at King’s College Hospital, London, UK. His main clinical and research interests are in pediatric gastroenterology, with a particular focus on pediatric hepatology and esophageal diseases, emphasising disease epidemiology and ethnic differences in disease presentation and outcomes.

Dr. Nassar believes that a good academic paper addresses a clear and meaningful research question, is grounded in relevant literature, and employs appropriate and transparent methodology. It presents its findings logically, supports claims with robust evidence, and clearly articulates its contribution to existing knowledge by exploring new mechanisms, new associations, or ways to change the current medical approach. Beyond technical rigor, a strong paper communicates ideas with clarity and precision, allowing readers from related disciplines to understand its significance. Ethical conduct, originality, and reproducibility are also essential characteristics of high-quality academic work.

According to Dr. Nassar, avoiding bias in academic writing requires self-awareness, methodological rigor, and critical reflection. Authors should base their claims on data rather than assumptions, present alternative interpretations when relevant, and transparently acknowledge limitations. Using neutral language, clearly defining terms, and subjecting work to peer review are also effective strategies. Engaging with diverse perspectives in the literature and being open to constructive criticism further helps minimise personal or disciplinary bias.

“Academic writing is both challenging and rewarding. Persistence, curiosity, and integrity are key to producing meaningful research. Even incremental contributions can have a lasting impact when conducted with rigor and honesty. I encourage fellow researchers to remain committed to learning, collaboration, and critical thinking, and to view writing not only as a means of dissemination, but as an essential part of refining ideas and advancing scientific progress,” says Dr. Nassar.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Nees Marquenie

Nees Marquenie, MD, MUEBTS, graduated as a general surgeon in October 2024 from the University of Ghent, Belgium. She has a specific interest in thoracic surgery. She is currently pursuing a fellowship at Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam, where she is gaining invaluable experience in a world-class academic and clinical environment. Erasmus Medical Center is a recognized reference center for mediastinal pathology and one of the leading institutions for anatomical lung resections in the Netherlands. The next step is a fellowship in robotic thoracic surgery at Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital in London. She firmly believes that experience abroad is essential for both personal and professional development. Even between geographically close countries, clinical practice and research environments can differ substantially, offering new perspectives and expanding one’s horizons. Her research interests focus on optimizing preoperative preparation for lung cancer surgery, advancing surgical techniques, and improving patient outcomes by integrating state-of-the-art technologies, including Virtual Reality. Connect with her on LinkedIn.

Dr. Marquenie believes that academic writing is fundamental because it facilitates the systematic sharing of knowledge, promotes scientific rigor, and fosters the development of new ideas and practices. Ensuring transparency allows others in the field to critically evaluate, reproduce, and build upon existing work. In doing so, academic writing helps establish a shared understanding of current knowledge and provides a solid foundation for future research. Over time, she has learned that scientific writing is a skill that develops through experience and collaboration within a supportive, critically engaged research team, which is essential for producing meaningful and reliable academic work.

Dr. Marquenie emphasizes the importance of engaging with the literature actively instead of simply summarizing it to avoid biases in writing. This involves carefully evaluating the quality, relevance, and limitations of sources, questioning underlying assumptions, and identifying gaps or inconsistencies in current knowledge. A critical approach also requires considering alternative perspectives and reflecting on how different methodologies or contexts may influence findings. Importantly, critical writing goes beyond reporting results by offering new interpretations or directions for future research. Collaboration and peer feedback are equally important, as input from a critically engaged team helps challenge biases, refine arguments, and strengthen the overall quality of the work.

“Academic writing often feels like running a marathon rather than a sprint,” shares Dr.Marquenie, “At the start, there is enthusiasm and plenty of ideas, but along the way, moments of mental fatigue inevitably arise, when progress slows, and structuring thoughts becomes challenging. The journey includes repeated rounds of revisions, from major changes to minor adjustments, and continuous exchanges with co-authors and reviewers can make the finish line seem far away. A good author must remain patient and adaptable, critically reflecting on their own work as well as on the suggestions being made, refining the manuscript based on feedback while preserving the integrity of the research. As with a marathon, success is rarely achieved alone. The guidance of mentors and the support of a collaborative team act like cheering along the course, providing motivation and direction when energy fades. Although demanding at times, crossing the finish line and delivering a well-crafted academic paper brings a strong sense of satisfaction. With perseverance and the right support, the effort is always worthwhile.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Samuel Tholl

Samuel Tholl is a third-year medical student at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, with an interest in otolaryngology – head and neck surgery. He obtained his Bachelor of Medical Sciences degree in physiology and pharmacology from Western University in Ontario, Canada. His research interests are in otolaryngology – head and neck surgery, focusing on rhinology, head and neck oncology, medical undergraduate otolaryngology education, and the use of artificial intelligence in the field. His recent and ongoing projects include evaluating the safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness of in-office sinonasal procedures for chronic rhinosinusitis, as well as exploring the use of artificial intelligence to enhance ear, nose, and throat-related patient education.

In Samuel’s view, a good academic paper addresses a meaningful gap in knowledge and provides findings that are applicable to real-world clinical or surgical practice. Beyond novelty, strong research should offer clear relevance to patient care, decision-making, or health systems, and ideally inform how physicians think or act in practice. Academic papers that succeed in translating new knowledge into practical insights, while remaining methodologically sound and clearly written, are the ones that ultimately have the greatest impact.

Samuel believes that it is important for authors to maintain a clear and focused take-away message that emphasizes practical application and clinical relevance during manuscript preparation. A paper must effectively convey the significance of its findings and their potential impact on real-world practices. Authors should also recognize that manuscript drafts are rarely perfect on their first iteration. Writing is an inherently iterative process, and the ability to respond to feedback in a productive and open-minded manner is essential to refining both the clarity and strength of the final message. Thoughtful engagement with co-authors, mentors, and reviewers often leads to a more rigorous, balanced, and impactful manuscript.

“Rather than a single memorable moment, what stands out to me during academic writing is an appreciation for how the process itself gives permanence and structure to clinical observations. In everyday clinical and surgical practice, many observations that feel important in the moment can easily be lost or forgotten with time. Academic writing provides a framework to critically reflect on these experiences, contextualize them within existing knowledge, and share them in a way that is accessible to others. Through this process, individual observations are transformed into structured messages that can inform practice, education, and future research. This experience reinforced for me the value of academic writing not only as a means of dissemination, but as a way to preserve and refine clinical insight,” says Samuel.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Shahzaib Khan

Shahzaib Khan, DO, is a board-certified psychiatrist near Chicago, Illinois. He is currently affiliated with Advocate Christ Medical Center and Advocate South Suburban Hospital. He is a diplomate of the American Board of Psychiatry and Neurology. He focuses on the treatment of psychiatric conditions in adults, addiction medicine, and neurocognitive disorders. He also specializes in electroconvulsive therapy for treatment-resistant cases. He earned his medical degree from the Chicago College of Osteopathic Medicine at Midwestern University and completed his psychiatry residency at Riverside Medical Center in Illinois. He has co-authored publications on the topics of psychosis, neuromodulation, and neuroinflammation. He has received multiple professional honors and awards.

Dr. Khan believes that a good academic paper should be clearly written and clinically or scientifically meaningful. The text should clearly define a research question, present relevant data, and build upon existing literature. Authors should be patient with revisions, stay unbiased and evidence-based, and ensure relevance to the field. Patience is necessary as revisions are an essential part of the peer-review process.

Dr. Khan is motivated to write academically in order to share knowledge, contribute significantly to clinical practice and science, and create an impact that extends beyond his immediate clinical responsibilities.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Anis Safura Ramli

Dr. Anis Safura Ramli earned an MBBS degree from Newcastle University, United Kingdom, in 1997. She obtained the MRCGP (UK) in 2006, a Fellowship in Chronic Disease Management from Monash University, Australia, in 2010, and the FRCGP (UK) in 2024. She is currently serving as a Consultant Family Medicine Specialist and Deputy Dean for Research and Innovation at the Faculty of Medicine, Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Malaysia. She is a prolific researcher in cardiovascular disease prevention and risk management, demonstrated by her publications of over 70 scientific research papers, Scopus h-index of 20 and Web of Science h-index of 14. She has extensive experience leading research teams for both national and international grants, and has established an international research collaboration with the University of Nottingham, UK. Her work has been recognized with awards, including the UiTM Best Researcher Award in 2020 and the Gold Medal Award at ITEX 2021. 

ACR: What are the most commonly encountered difficulties in academic writing?

Dr. Ramli: In the early stage of my academic career, I encountered various challenges in academic writing, such as the struggle to acquire the right skills and also to juggle my time between many responsibilities, from teaching, clinical service, to research and personal life. Balancing these tasks can feel overwhelming at times. However, the key to success is passion, perseverance, and grit. As the years go by, academic writing becomes a second nature, a part and parcel of being a medical lecturer.

ACR: Academic writing often involves synthesizing evidence. What tips can you share for selecting appropriate evidence, and what should authors keep in mind during this process?

Dr. Ramli: In evidence-based academic writing, it is essential to understand the main types of published evidence to synthesize, and to choose the most suitable method for addressing a specific health-related question. Decision-making in healthcare should be based on the best available evidence, published in reputable academic journals. Therefore, it is important to understand the concept of the hierarchy of research evidence - from secondary studies such as systematic reviews and meta-analysis, original research articles such as randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, cross-sectional studies and case-controlled studies, and also case series and case reports. Researchers often use evidence synthesis-structured methods to establish what is known on a topic and to identify the gaps in the literature, requiring further research.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Caitlin Bernardo

Dr. Caitlin Bernardo’s interests are strongly rooted in exercise science, shaped by her background in competitive athletics and her experience playing collegiate soccer. During her undergraduate studies at Minnesota State, Mankato, she worked in a neuroendocrine research laboratory investigating how exercise and seasonal variation influence brain development in green anole lizards. She then decided to pursue osteopathic medical training because of its holistic philosophy and emphasis on musculoskeletal education at Western University of Health Sciences. Throughout medical school, she became increasingly drawn to emergency medicine due to its collaborative environment, high acuity, and the breadth of pathology encountered. She since completed her residency at Medical University of South Carolina, where she managed a particularly impactful neurologic case as a family had sought out their academic emergency facility due to the rapid decline of their father without any answers. Building on her longstanding interest in sports medicine, she is currently completing a primary care sports medicine fellowship, where she is engaged in a research project examining the short- and long-term effects of intra-articular steroid injections.

ACR: What role does academic writing play in science?

Dr. Bernardo: Academic writing is crucial in science as it converts clinical observations and practice-based insights into knowledge that can be critically assessed and applied more widely. In fields like emergency medicine, where decisions are often made rapidly and with limited information, academic writing creates the structure needed to reflect on complex cases, analyze patterns, and translate frontline experience into evidence that can improve patient care. Academic writing serves as a bridge between hands-on clinical practice and the scientific community. It provides a way to share meaningful cases, question existing assumptions, and contribute to research that ultimately shapes diagnostic strategies, patient counseling, and treatment algorithms. By engaging in academic writing, I can connect the immediacy of emergency care and the longitudinal perspective of sports medicine with the broader scientific conversation, ensuring that patient experiences inform future evidence-based practice.

ACR: The burden of being a scientist/doctor is heavy. How do you allocate time to write papers?

Dr. Bernardo: To be an effective clinician is to practice evidence-based medicine, and for me, that means deliberately integrating my bedside experiences with the most current literature. As I mentioned earlier, the intersection between lived clinical practice and evolving scientific evidence is where the most meaningful insights emerge. When I approach medicine through this dual lens—both as a scientist and as a physician—the process of writing and contributing to academic work feels less like an additional task and more like a natural extension of my identity as a clinician. Rather than carving out artificial time to “be a researcher,” I find that the questions raised during shifts, the diagnostic challenges, and the patient stories naturally evolve into academic pursuits. In that sense, writing becomes a continuation of the clinical reasoning I already practice every day, allowing me to translate real-world observations into scholarship that can benefit future patients.

ACR: How do you ensure your writing is up-to-date and can give new insights to the field of research?

Dr. Bernardo: Entering medicine requires embracing the reality that you are committing to being a lifelong learner and taking that responsibility head-on. I stay updated with new evidence by using various resources that each play a distinct role in my learning process. I regularly follow content from EMRAP for rapid, practice-changing updates relevant to emergency medicine, and I participate in journal clubs where I can critically appraise new studies alongside colleagues to discuss how the findings should influence clinical practice. I also subscribe to several academic journals and attend research symposiums across emergency medicine and sports medicine, which allows me to examine original research, evolving guidelines, and expert commentary in greater depth. Together, these approaches help ensure that my clinical decisions—and my academic writing—are grounded in the most current, high-quality evidence available.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Leila C. Tou

Dr. Leila Tou is a PGY-2 Internal Medicine resident at Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine in Dayton, Ohio. Her academic interests center on clinical scholarship, quality improvement, and medical education, with a focus on turning real-world clinical problems into practical, evidence-based interventions. During residency, she has been actively involved in case reports, meta-analyses, and quality improvement work, including a penicillin allergy de-labeling initiative aimed at improving antibiotic stewardship and patient outcomes. She enjoys translating clinical experiences and data into publications and presentations that are useful to both trainees and practicing clinicians. She also values mentorship and education and hopes to build a long-term career in academic medicine that integrates clinical care, teaching, and research.

Dr. Tou asserts that a good paper has a clear message and makes it easy for the reader to understand why it matters. She thinks the strongest clinical papers, especially case reports, are built around a real question that comes from the bedside: “Was this diagnosis missed? Was management uncertain? Was the outcome unexpected?” The writing should mirror that logic.  The key message should appear consistently in the introduction, case description, and discussion, rather than being buried at the end. A great paper does not read like a “mystery story”; it reads like a well-reasoned clinical argument that teaches something practical and evidence-based.

Dr. Tou points out that people typically do not read a paper at random; instead, they find it when facing the same clinical issue. That means relevance and clarity matter. It also means the details have to be purposeful: not just a list of labs and imaging, but the clinical context, the rationale for key decisions, and what happened to the patient afterwards. The best writing is focused, honest about limitations, intentional about its learning points, and grounded in an accurate interpretation of the literature.

“Academic writing can feel intimidating because it’s easy to believe every paper needs to be ‘groundbreaking’. But clinical scholarship is often more about accumulating useful truth—one careful case report, review, or quality improvement project at a time. Some of the most valuable insights come from paying attention: noticing the unexpected, asking why it happened, conducting a literature search, and sharing the lessons learned so that others can take better care of the next patient. If you are in training, do not underestimate how powerful that process is; it builds your clinical reasoning, strengthens your teaching skills, and helps you contribute to medicine in a way that lasts,” says Dr. Tou.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Grace Gorecki

Dr. Grace Gorecki is an Internal Medicine resident at Allegheny Health Network, with a focus on haematology–oncology and translational cancer research. She previously trained as a postdoctoral researcher at UPMC, where her work centered on ovarian and cervical cancer, investigating mesenchymal stem cells and immune cell interactions within the tumor microenvironment. She is particularly interested in women’s cancers and immuno-oncology research. Her current projects include studies in triple-negative breast cancer, ovarian cancer ctDNA analysis, and real-world research examining complications related to immunotherapy.

According to Dr. Gorecki, academic writing is the process through which discoveries become shared knowledge that can be tested by others and continuously developed until it ultimately transforms patient care. Without rigorous, peer-reviewed writing, even meaningful findings remain isolated observations. Clear scientific communication ensures reproducibility, enables critical appraisal, and facilitates the translation of research into improved patient outcomes. For clinicians, it also serves as a bridge between bedside questions and population-level answers.

To ensure the writing remains current and insightful, Dr. Gorecki routinely uses platforms such as OpenEvidence and UpToDate to quickly identify newly published studies relevant to the topics she is working on. She also actively tracks emerging clinical trials, major conference abstracts, and recent publications within her focus areas. When developing a manuscript, she aims not only to align her work with the most current evidence but also to identify gaps where additional analysis or real-world data can provide new perspectives. By continuously integrating new literature and refining her research questions, this iterative process helps ensure that her work contributes meaningful and timely insights rather than simply summarizing existing knowledge.

“My primary motivation in writing is patients. Through research and transforming those findings into manuscripts, I hope the information generated can help guide better treatments and improve outcomes for future patients. I also hope that my work can contribute to further studies that ultimately influence clinical practice. Every dataset represents real individuals whose experiences can teach us how to care for future patients more effectively. Writing is the mechanism that transforms those experiences into actionable knowledge. I am especially motivated by research questions that directly influence clinical decision-making,” says Dr. Gorecki.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Masanori Okada

Masanori Okada, MD, PhD, is the Medical Director of the Division of Thoracic Surgery at National Hospital Organization Yamaguchi Ube Medical Center in Ube, Yamaguchi, Japan. He is a thoracic surgeon with expertise in the surgical management of thoracic diseases, including lung cancer, pneumothorax, empyema, and mediastinal tumors. His clinical practice focuses on minimally invasive thoracic surgery, particularly video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). In recent years, he has been actively working to expand the indications for uniportal VATS in order to further reduce surgical invasiveness and enhance postoperative recovery. His academic interests include the development of evidence-based surgical strategies and the advancement of minimally invasive techniques in thoracic surgery. Through both clinical practice and research, he seeks to improve surgical outcomes while delivering patient-centered care that considers each patient’s social background and quality of life.

Dr. Okada points out that clarity and integrity are the essential elements of a good academic paper. Even when a study has novelty, reliability, and validity, it may not be widely read if the writing is difficult to understand, and unclear expressions may lead readers to misunderstand the message. Therefore, it is important to express ideas clearly and communicate the intended message accurately. In addition, to ensure the credibility and validity of the research, results should be reported honestly and interpreted carefully and logically, and the manuscript should be improved through a fair and constructive peer-review process.

Dr. Okada emphasizes that a key skill for authors is a strong sense of responsibility in publishing medical findings, along with a sincere commitment to clear communication. Sharing research or clinical outcomes known primarily to the author—particularly treatment experiences in rare or previously unreported cases described in case reports—is an important contribution to the advancement of medicine. Such information sharing may also help clinicians who encounter similar situations in the future. Moreover, accumulating and sharing clinical experiences may provide clues for overcoming medical challenges that remain unresolved. Another important skill is logical thinking. By carefully interpreting one’s own results and comparing them with previous reports, authors can assess the credibility and validity of their work and clearly express the novelty derived from their findings.

“When writing a manuscript, I often find myself revising the text repeatedly because I want to present the results honestly and as clearly as possible. While considering which expressions are most appropriate, I sometimes spend far more time writing than I initially expected. After completing a manuscript, I often recall two Japanese sayings: one suggests that ‘slow and steady wins the race,’ while the other reminds me that sometimes it may be better to produce imperfect work quickly than to pursue perfection too slowly. I still find myself wondering which approach is more appropriate for academic writing, and perhaps that question itself is part of the writing process,” says Dr. Okada.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Shaikha Almheiri

Dr. Shaikha Almheiri is a Senior Resident in Obstetrics and Gynaecology based in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, with a strong academic focus on fetal and obstetric medicine. She holds a Diploma in Biomedical Sciences from Tralee, Ireland, and an MBBS from the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. She has also contributed to research at the John Radcliffe Hospital in the United Kingdom. She is actively engaged in oral poster presentations, clinical research, and academic mentorship, with a particular interest in high-risk obstetrics and the dissemination of rare clinical cases to advance medical knowledge. She has authored three publications to date and is currently leading a cohort study scheduled for publication later this year. Her professional philosophy centers on integrating clinical excellence with academic rigor, promoting research integrity, transparent reporting, and the translation of evidence into meaningful, patient-centered care.

ACR: What is the role of academic writing in science?

Dr. Almheiri: Academic writing is the foundation upon which scientific progress is built. It transforms clinical observations, experimental findings, and theoretical insights into structured knowledge that can be scrutinized, replicated, and applied globally. Beyond mere documentation, academic writing ensures transparency, methodological clarity, and intellectual accountability. It allows science to be cumulative as each publication forms a building block for future inquiry. In medicine, particularly, high-quality academic writing directly influences clinical guidelines, patient safety, and healthcare policy. Therefore, precision, clarity, and ethical integrity are not optional but are essential.

ACR: Academic writing often requires evidence synthesis. What tips do you have for selecting the right evidence?

Dr. Almheiri: Effective evidence synthesis begins with a clearly defined research question, ideally structured using frameworks such as PICO. Authors must prioritize methodological quality over quantity, critically appraising study design, sample size, risk of bias, confounding variables, and statistical robustness. Hierarchies of evidence should guide the selection process, with systematic reviews and well-conducted randomized trials generally providing stronger inferential value than observational data, while also acknowledging the contextual importance of real-world evidence. During synthesis, transparency is paramount. Inclusion and exclusion criteria must be predefined, heterogeneity carefully evaluated, and limitations openly acknowledged. Authors must remain vigilant against confirmation bias and selective reporting. Ultimately, synthesis should aim not only to summarize data but to interpret it responsibly, highlighting areas of consensus, uncertainty, and future research directions.

ACR: Is it important for authors to follow reporting guidelines when preparing manuscripts?

Dr. Almheiri: Absolutely. Reporting guidelines are essential tools that enhance scientific rigor, reproducibility, and credibility. Frameworks such as CONSORT, PRISMA, and STROBE provide structured checklists that ensure critical methodological details are neither omitted nor ambiguously described. Adherence to these guidelines strengthens peer review, facilitates evidence synthesis, and increases the likelihood that findings can inform clinical practice and policy. More importantly, reporting guidelines reflect a commitment to ethical scholarship. Transparent reporting respects readers, reviewers, and patients whose data underpin research findings. In an era of rapidly expanding scientific literature, structured reporting safeguards clarity and maintains trust in academic publishing.

(by Sasa Zhu, Masaki Lo)

Svjetlana Mikulić

Dr. Svjetlana Mikulić is a pediatrician at University Clinical Hospital Mostar and a doctoral candidate at the Faculty of Medicine, University of Mostar, where she serves as an assistant lecturer in the Department of Pediatrics. She completed her pediatric residency at the Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital of Split. She previously worked in the Department of Neonatology and Pediatric Intensive Care Unit and currently practices in pediatric pulmonology. Her clinical and research interests include neonatology, pediatric intensive care, and pediatric pulmonology, with particular focus on respiratory infections and complex clinical presentations in childhood. She has contributed to peer-reviewed publications and clinical case reports addressing pediatric conditions and outcomes. She views academic writing as an extension of clinical responsibility, allowing careful documentation of experience and thoughtful contribution to the broader pediatric community.

From Dr. Mikulić’s view, a good academic paper is built around a well-defined clinical problem.  It is essential for the readers to grasp the significance of the topic from the outset. The methodology used must be appropriate for the research question, and the process should be transparent, allowing others to follow the reasoning and understand how the conclusions were drawn. Results should be presented clearly, without exaggerating their importance. A strong paper does not need to be complex; it needs to be accurate, balanced, and relevant to clinical practice.

Dr. Mikulić stresses that authors should remember that every sentence carries responsibility. Data must be checked carefully, terminology used consistently, and conclusions kept within the limits of the findings. It is easy to become attached to one’s own interpretation, so remaining critical and open to alternative explanations is important. Respect for ethical standards and patient confidentiality is essential, especially in case reports. Careful preparation reflects respect for both patients and colleagues who will read the work.

“Academic writing can be slow and demanding, particularly alongside daily clinical work. However, documenting clinical experience is one way of contributing beyond one’s own department or hospital. Not every project needs to be large to be meaningful. Careful observation, persistence, and willingness to learn from revisions are often enough to produce work that has value. Over time, this steady effort builds both confidence and lasting contribution,” says Dr. Mikulić.

(by Sasa Zhu, Masaki Lo)