In 2023, many 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, with a brief interview of their thoughts and insights as authors. Allow us to express our heartfelt gratitude for their tremendous effort and valuable contributions to the scientific process.

Outstanding Authors (2023)

Houman Rezaizadeh, UConn Health, USA

Stephen J. Heller, Temple University Hospital, USA

Shamus R. Carr, National Institutes of Health/NCI, USA

Thomad Haist, Asklepios Paulinen Clinic, Germany

Houman Rezaizadeh

Dr. Houman Rezaizadeh is a board-certified Gastroenterologist and Associate Professor of Medicine at UConn Health, USA. He attended Rutgers New Jersey Medical School and completed his residency at the University of Rochester. He then went on to complete his GI fellowship at UConn Health where he ultimately stayed on as faculty. He is currently the founder and Director of the UConn Esophageal Disease Center and Associate Program Director of the Gastroenterology Fellowship Program. Dr. Rezaizadeh has a specialized interest in esophageal diseases, particularly in Barrett’s Esophagus, GERD, esophageal motility and Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE). He is involved in clinical trials and multiple research studies as well as being an active educator in the GI Fellowship Program. From a clinical education standpoint, he has worked closely with the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) to improve and optimize utility of their procedure log for GI Fellows around the country.

Academic writing and research are the heart of medical science and essential to advancement of our medical knowledge. Taking Eosinophilic Esophagitis (EoE) as an example, Dr. Rezaizadeh believes that it is amazing to compare our knowledge of EoE today to that of just 10 years ago when he was a GI fellow. He adds, “It is astonishing how much we have learned and the progress made. EoE went from a disease thought to be a subset of reflux to now, its own disease entity with a significant amount of ongoing research to help further our understanding of the disease. Such advances and research efforts are what make medical science an exciting and ever evolving field.”

Speaking of how to ensure one’s writing is critical, Dr. Rezaizadeh points out that whenever he has an idea about a project or research, he always reviews the most recent literature to make sure what he writes actually contributes to the current fund of knowledge. He thinks this helps his articles be as critical and relevant as possible.

In addition, Dr. Rezaizadeh emphasizes that institutional review board (IRB) approval is critical for any research involving human subjects and/or patient health information to make sure one is compliant with rules and regulations meant to protect personal health information as well as the safety of research subject. Even when doing an IRB exempt project, he always submits an IRB exemption request to make sure the study meets exemption criteria and that he remains in compliance.

“Academic writing and research absolutely takes a lot of time and effort, but what keeps me motivated is the excitement of reporting something new or novel to help advance our medical field and the care of our patients. I find additional motivation from working with eager fellows and residents who share the same passion,” says Dr. Rezaizadeh.

(By Brad Li, Eunice X. Xu)

Stephen J. Heller

Dr. Stephen J. Heller is the director of Endoscopy in the Section of Gastroenterology and the professor of Medicine at Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University. His interests include the practice and training of advanced endoscopic procedures such as endoscopic ultrasound for the diagnosis and staging of gastrointestinal tumors, ERCP for the diagnosis and treatment of diseases of the pancreaticobiliary tree, including cholechololithiasis and tumors of the pancreas and bile duct. Endoscopic ultrasound is also an important tool in the evaluation of pancreatic cysts, in particular, whether a patient with cysts in the pancreas is at risk of development of pancreatic cancer. He is also interested in endoscopic mucosal resection of large polyps throughout the gastrointestinal tract, particularly in the colon and rectum. Removal of large, precancerous polyps without surgery is a more convenient, safer and more cost-effective approach to the removal of these lesions when feasible. Click here to learn more about Dr. Heller.

Being asked what is fascinating about academic writing, Dr. Heller says, “Academic publications form the basis of our clinical knowledge. The clinical management of our patients is built upon the foundation of medical literature. We rely on academic writing to advance our knowledge of science and medicine, in order to serve the ultimate goal, which is the betterment of our patients.”

Dr. Heller believes a good academic paper should address a subject that is timely and worth exploring. It should have its aims stated clearly, and written in concise, readable language. A helpful guideline, when writing a paper, is to assume that the reader of the paper has a limited knowledge of the subject, thereby encouraging the author to above all make his or her comments readily comprehensible.

Academic writing often involves evidence synthesis. On the selection of the appropriate evidence for synthesis and analysis, Dr. Heller shares, “When authors are working on a manuscript, I recommend a collaborative approach. We always have something we can learn from a trusted colleague. Preferred sources should include peer-reviewed manuscripts generally rather than abstract presentations or review articles. Although classic manuscripts are useful, I generally prefer relying more heavily on recent publications.”

From an author’s perspective, Dr. Heller thinks it is important to follow reporting guidelines. He favors relying on Narrative Review checklist, in order to maintain organization and efficiency. This will also streamline the process for the publisher, who may ask you to contribute again in the future!

(by Alisa Lu, Brad Li)

Shamus R. Carr

Shamus Carr, MD, is currently an associate research physician and staff thoracic surgeon in the Thoracic Surgery Branch at the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. Clinically, he specializes in minimally invasive approaches to thoracic malignancies. His research focuses on exploring genetic and epigenetic alterations in early-stage lung cancer and ways to both identify and treat those most likely to recur.

Dr. Carr believes that academic writing is critically important, as reporting advances has the opportunity to help hundreds or thousands of patients that are cared for by other physicians.

Dr. Carr also identifies two of the most common problems encountered in academic writing. First, as an author of a manuscript, one needs to keep an open mind to constructive criticism for reviewers. However, the peer-review process can sometimes be difficult. While the intention of most reviewers is to help clarify the manuscript, care must be exercised so as not to alter the message based solely on the reviewers’ comments. Second is that editors should do a better job when a paper is rejected without being sent out for peer review, briefly explaining the reason without it being a templated response. This feedback could be extremely helpful for authors.

To ensure one’s writing is critical, Dr. Carr says it is important to write clearly and concisely while not inflating the results, findings of the research, or conclusions drawn by the authors. A manuscript should read like a good story that is appropriately introduced, has a clear plan, presents even complex results in an understandable manner, and brings the concept full circle with conclusions that highlight the advancement made and the limitations to keep in mind as others apply these results to their own patients or research.

Finally, Dr. Carr wants to encourage other academic writers who devote themselves to advancing scientific progress, “Great ideas for research can come from anyone. While the reason for rejection of a manuscript can at times seem arbitrary, do not allow that to end the process.”

(by Alisa Lu, Brad Li)

Thomas Haist

Dr. Haist is a board-certified surgeon specializing in upper-gi-obesity- and metabolic surgery. He completed his training in the Dr. Horst Schmidt-Kliniken in Germany under the supervision of Prof. D. Lorenz and continued his career working as a consultant in Offenbach, Germany. He underwent special training in gastric cancer surgery at SNUH (Prof. H.K. Yang, Seoul, South Korea) and obesity surgery (Prof. R. Weiner, Offenbach, Germany). Currently, Dr. Haist is head of the department for upper GI surgery at the Asklepios Paulinen Clinic in Wiesbaden, Germany. His main interests are oncologic- and functional upper-GI surgery and obesity surgery. Recent projects include grading of complications in esophageal surgery and implementation of robotics in bariatric surgery. Learn more about Dr. Haist’s work here.

Surgical success relies on surgical experience. In view of this, Dr. Haist believes it is of utmost importance to share the experiences we have to gain knowledge and to improve our actions. There lies the importance of academic writing. To him, a manuscript should have a clear focus and conclusion to be drawn, which can, therefore, help to improve our actions. A surgeon can only recognize a complication when his mindset and knowledge allow him to be vigilant.

“Improving the outcome of your work requires the recording and analysis of your own data. This can be regarded as a treasure too valuable to be shared with others. Also, the process of academic writing offers an in-depth insight into the subject and therefore broadens your personal expertise,” says Dr. Haist.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)