In 2024, APC reviewers continue to make 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.
March, 2024
Nestoras Mathioudakis, Johns Hopkins University, USA
March, 2024
Nestoras Mathioudakis
Nestoras Mathioudakis, MD, MHS, is an Associate Professor of Medicine at the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, where he holds joint appointments in the Divisions of Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism and Biomedical Informatics & Data Science. He completed his medical training, residency, and fellowship at Johns Hopkins. Dr. Mathioudakis’s research interests include health informatics applications in diabetes prevention and management, with a particular focus on the use of machine learning/artificial intelligence applications. He has authored over 100 publications in diabetes and has contributed to consensus guidelines in the field. He is an active NIH-funded clinical investigator with several ongoing randomized controlled trials in diabetes and prediabetes. Connect with him on LinkedIn.
In Dr. Mathioudakis’ opinion, peer review is a fundamental component of both research and scientific communication. It serves several critical functions. Primarily, it ensures that research findings presented to the public and the scientific community are the outcome of rigorous investigation, thereby confirming the reliability and validity of the conclusions. In an era, rife with misinformation, peer review acts as a critical safeguard, helping to ensure that the information disseminated to the public is factually accurate. Furthermore, it maintains academic integrity by requiring that prior work be properly acknowledged and cited. This not only fosters an environment of respect and recognition among researchers but also contributes to the progressive accumulation of knowledge within specific research domains.
Dr. Mathioudakis points out that the current peer-review system faces significant challenges. He indicates that for academics in medical fields such as himself, peer review tasks must be balanced with other responsibilities such as patient care, research, and administrative duties. Often, this means that peer review encroaches on personal/family time. In a typical week, he may receive up to 10 peer-review requests, compelling him to decline most to maintain his primary professional responsibilities. He follows a policy of accepting as many peer-review requests as the number of papers he submits to journals. When time is limited, he prioritizes those requests that are most closely related to his field of research. Despite this, the bulk of his peer-review work is conducting during evenings and weekends. In addition to the time commitment, he thinks that there is considerable variability in review quality, partly because reviewers are unpaid and often must fit this work into already crowded schedules. This can lead to rushed reviews and substantial delays, which in turn can jeopardize timely publication and affect subsequent funding opportunities.
“Unfortunately, there is no easy solution to the challenges faced by the current peer-review system,” says Dr. Mathioudakis, who reckons that offering direct compensation to reviewers might incentivize them to accept reviews, which could lead to more efficient review process, but it could also introduce conflicts of interest or biases and potentially lead to higher journal publication or subscription fees. Alternatively, research funders could earmark specific portions of grants to support peer-review activities, enabling academic institutions to provide dedicated time for faculty to conduct peer reviews without affecting their financial resources. Such changes could help maintain the quality and timeliness of peer reviews, ultimately supporting the scientific community more efficiently.
“Peer reviewers truly are the unsung heroes of the scientific world. While they may not receive public acknowledgment in publications, their contributions are pivotal in shaping high-quality, impactful research. To all peer reviewers: take pride in knowing that your efforts help refine the science that can profoundly affect patient care and advance our understanding of medicine. Though often behind the scenes, your role is fundamental to scientific progress,” says Dr. Mathioudakis.
(by Lareina Lim, Brad Li)
