In 2022, many AOB 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 (2022)

Cyril Jacquot, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Children’s National Hospital, USA

Paolo Rebulla, Foundation IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Italy

Sandra Ramirez-Arcos, Department of Biochemistry, University of Ottawa, Canada

Yvette C. Tanhehco, Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, USA

Gregory A. Denomme, Grifols Laboratory Solutions Inc., USA

Cyril Jacquot

Dr. Cyril Jacquot is a clinical pathologist with blood bank/transfusion medicine specialization at Children’s National Hospital in Washington, DC, USA. He was trained at University of California, San Francisco, for residency and fellowship. At Children’s National Hospital, he oversees the hospital-based blood donor center, the hematology/coagulation clinical laboratory, as well as a small laboratory in a regional outpatient center. He also covers clinical service for the blood bank and therapeutic apheresis. His research interests include massive transfusion, blood transfusion safety, and donor eligibility rules. Connect with Dr. Jacquot on LinkedIn.

On conducting research, Dr. Jacquot thinks that we always have to remember the key points we are trying to answer. This will guide our investigation and help organize the manuscript at the end. He thinks a good writer must be able to distill a lot of information and data into a document that guides the readers through the findings. Reading articles is a good way to learn about effective writing techniques. If an article is easy to read and follow, the author is doing a good job of communicating with the readers.

When discussing on ways to avoid biases in one’s writing, Dr. Jacquot points out that we have to read articles from authors holding different views from us. When doing a literature review, we do not want to limit ourselves to papers that agree with our viewpoint. When writing a discussion about the work, we have to be sure that the data support what we are saying and not what we wish they support. Authors also have to acknowledge limitations of the study. This helps present a more balanced view for the readers.

Dr. Jacquot also shares his view on the institutional review board (IRB). He thinks the IRB protects the rights and welfare of patients participating in research and it serves as an advocate for patients. The IRB ensures that informed consent is obtained, that study protocols are followed, and that patient data and privacy are protected. Without the IRB, a study may focus on getting as much data as possible despite potential harm to patients. For example, there may be excessive blood draws, or a researcher may want to continue investigating a medication despite reports of serious side effects on the participants, all of which are not desired in the process.

Finally, Dr. Jacquot leaves the following note as an encouragement to junior academic writers: “Writing takes time and practice. We must be able to tell a story about the research that will interest the readers. Don’t be afraid to seek out feedback from colleagues to improve the manuscript drafts. It is also invaluable to find a mentor who can connect us with other writers and who can recommend journals for manuscript submissions.”

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Paolo Rebulla

Dr. Paolo Rebulla, MD, currently serves at the Department of Transfusion Medicine, Foundation IRCCS Ca’ Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, Milan, Italy. He was born in Trieste and graduated in Milan in Medicine and Surgery in 1973. He holds a specialty in Clinical and Laboratory Hematology and in Immunohematology. From 2005 to 2013, he directed the Service of Transfusion Medicine, Cell Therapy and Cryobiology of the Foundation Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico Hospital. As a member of scientific societies in the area of transfusion, hematology and transplantation, he is involved in biomedical and biotechnological research, with particular reference to platelet transfusion of patients suffering from blood diseases, cell cryopreservation and cellular therapy. Dr. Rebulla is the author or co-author of about 300 scientific publications, 242 of which registered in PubMed (google scholar h-index 61). In 2017, he was a co-founder of Episkey srl, a start-up company aimed at developing novel reagents and biopharmaceuticals from umbilical cord blood.

Good quality academic writing is of paramount importance for the development of life sciences. During the early years of Dr. Rebulla’s profession in transfusion medicine, he learnt the basis of academic writing from his mentor, Professor Girolamo Sirchia: short sentences with no more than one or two subordinates, clear statement on the (possibly one) objective, separate paragraphs for methods, results and discussion, careful use of conjunctions, well balanced use of references, accurate declaration of conflicts of interest (COI).

Further on, Dr. Rebulla, as a non-English native speaker, learnt a lot from the Manual of Style (8th Ed) of the American Medical Association and from L. Lennie Irvin’s essay “What is Academic Writing?”, a chapter on “Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing”. The latter essay, although mostly focused on humanities and academic writing in college, may be particularly useful for young academic writers involved in life sciences, as it provides guidance on what the author considers “five myths in academic writing” and describes key characteristics of “critical essays”, including the following: 1) make a point and support it; 2) your point (the “claim” or “thesis”) should be open to interpretation, not a statement of the obvious; 3) divide your arguments in clear paragraphs; 4) support your statements with appropriate sources (references); 5) choose an appropriate citation style; 6) be careful of grammatical correctness. Following the above points proved very valuable to him during the lengthy process of manuscript drafting, revision, submission for publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals and finally responding to the comments by the referees and by the journal’s editor.

In Dr. Rebulla’s view, staying updated in science may be difficult and time consuming if one does not develop an appropriate strategy. He explains, “I usually start any working day by checking the content of the main scientific journals in my discipline, together with 2-3 high-rank journals in general medicine. Among the latter, my preference goes to JAMA for its broad set of topics and its attention to social issues. I also frequently access PubMed and the clinical trial registry Clinicaltrials.gov with some key words representing my principal current interests: platelet transfusion and umbilical cord blood.”

“During the current ‘senior’ part of my life, most of my professional time is devoted to reading, thinking and writing. I spend limited time at the laboratory bench, where younger, skilled investigators carry out the experimental work. A significant portion of my time is used to analyze and interpret the results, with particular attention to statistical analysis and clinical relevance. Despite my significant commitment, I like to be ‘non-obsessive’ with my profession and leave appropriate time for my musical hobbies and my family,” says Dr. Rebulla.

(By Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Sandra Ramirez-Arcos

Dr. Sandra Ramirez-Arcos is a Senior Scientist at Canadian Blood Services and an Adjunct Professor at the University of Ottawa in Ottawa, Canada. She completed her bachelor and master’s degree in microbiology in her native Colombia, and her PhD studies in biological sciences in Spain. From 1998 to 2002, she did her post-doctoral training and worked as a research associate at the University of Ottawa, Canada. In 2003, she joined Canadian Blood Services and obtained her adjunct professorship at the University of Ottawa. Dr. Ramirez-Arcos has built a strong team with expertise on bloodborne bacteria with focus on understanding bacterial growth dynamics, with interests in biofilm formation and molecular modulation during blood component storage. Her laboratory oversees the development, validation and implementation of protocols and processes aiming at enhancing blood component safety. Learn more about Dr. Ramirez from here.

When discussing academic writing, Dr. Ramirez-Arcos first points out scientific advances are only possible with effective communication of research results. She considers that knowledge translation complements research as it allows the scientific community to learn about new discoveries or validation of previous findings. Furthermore, she thinks academic writing is also very important for future generations as it provides baseline knowledge to build new studies. Dr. Ramirez-Arcos further shares her view on a successful academic writing. It all depends on having a clear research question, and then, being able to collect all the information and extract what is relevant to either confirm or negate a specific hypothesis. She mentions having scattered results that were collected with no purpose diminishes the value of research, therefore it is important to be focused when analyzing and summarizing data.

In order to avoid biases in one’s writing, Dr. Ramirez-Arcos thinks it is paramount to base writing on confirmed facts derived from results that were reproduced in several technical replicates. Statistical analyses should be performed for proper planning of number of repetitions. Scientific writing should be based on evidence and data, and not on preformed or preconceived research outcomes. She suggests that one of the best ways to avoid biases while writing is to always ask for peer review of the drafts of reports or manuscripts.

Finally, in terms of disclosure of Conflict of Interest (COI), she agrees it would help avoid biases. Also, disclosure of COI can help eliminate any peer pressure or external influence, for example, when dealing with commercial products or companies.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Yvette C. Tanhehco

Dr. Yvette Tanhehco is an Associate Professor of Pathology and Cell Biology, Director of the Cellular Therapy Laboratory and Assistant Director of Transfusion Medicine at New York - Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, USA. She obtained Bachelor of Arts degree in Microbiology and Molecular and Cell Biology from Cornell University, Medical degree from the University of Pittsburgh, Master of Science degree in Translational Research from the University of Pennsylvania, and Doctor of Philosophy degree in Viral Oncology from Johns Hopkins University. She completed her residency training in Clinical Pathology followed by fellowship training in Blood Banking/Transfusion Medicine both at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. Her research interests focus on cellular and gene therapies for sickle cell disease, specifically strategies for optimizing apheresis collections of cellular therapy. She is also interested in blood donations, component manufacturing, and transfusion. Connect with Dr. Tanhehco on LinkedIn or Twitter.

Dr. Tanhehco loves reading and writing. For her, academic writing is an opportunity to share the research findings with the world and it is a channel for her to contribute to the advancement of science and medicine. She thinks the reviewers’ comments/suggestions on the manuscript are often helpful as well to improve the study and paper.  It is also one of the requirements for academic promotions.  She tries to keep up with the publications in her field of interest by reading papers on a regular basis.  Prior to designing a study, she searches the literature or confers with her colleagues to see where the knowledge gaps are to make sure that her study would address some of these knowledge gaps.  And in the process of writing the manuscript, she makes sure to put the study results in the context of new or recent findings.

In addition, Dr. Tanhehco thinks clinical work helps her see areas or issues in her scope of practice that need to be addressed and/or standardized. She exemplifies by sharing that when she and her team started collecting stem cells for gene therapy in patients with sickle cell disease a few years ago, they quickly realized that the usual collection parameters for patients without sickle cell disease did not result in an efficient collection.  She spoke to her colleagues and searched the published literature but there was very little that they knew back then about the optimal collection parameters. They have since focused the career on working with others to determine the best collection parameters to use to improve the stem cell collection efficiency of patients with sickle cell disease. By writing about the challenges and potential strategies to overcome these challenges when performing apheresis collections of patients with sickle cell disease, Dr. Tanhehco hopes to bring the issues to the forefront to inspire investigators to conduct research in the area.

Speaking of data sharing in scientific writing, Dr. Tanhehco thinks sharing it is extremely important for diseases that have a low incidence/prevalence in order to be able to have a large N to detect small differences.  It is sometimes not possible to conduct studies in a single institution because the number of patients with that disease is small but when you combine multiple institutions, you can have enough patients and power for the study to get meaningful results with broad applicability. The natural history of diseases could also be affected by geographic location which would be evident when data are shared across institutions located in different places. Data sharing among researchers can also be viewed as a networking opportunity and could foster future collaborations on research projects. She emphasizes that a secure way should be applied for data sharing and patient confidentiality should be maintained by de-identifying the data and sharing the least amount of information necessary.  Institutional review board approval should be obtained.

When being asked of the most commonly encountered difficulties in academic writing, Dr. Tanhehco points out that time is the biggest hurdle. When competing priorities involve patient care, administrative leadership, and/or resident/fellow education, it is easy to put academic writing low on the priority list. “In order to write, I also need a quiet environment with no interruptions and minimal distractions. This makes it hard to write while at work so I tend to do most of my writing on the weekends. When there are multiple collaborators on a manuscript, it is sometimes challenging to get all the components of the manuscript together in a timely manner because everyone’s schedule is variable. It can also be challenging to unify and streamline manuscripts when the authors have different writing styles,” shares she.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Gregory A. Denomme

Dr. Denomme is a clinical and academic trained scientist. He obtained a doctorate in microbiology and immunology then completed his postdoctoral fellowships in platelet immunology and in Pathology and Molecular Medicine. Past academic appointments include Associate Professorship, Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology at the University of Toronto, Canada and Senior Investigator with Versiti’s Blood Research Institute, Milwaukee, the US. Presently, Dr. Denomme is the Laboratory Director and Head of Research and Development at Grifols Laboratory Solutions in San Marcos, Texas, the US. His applied research integrates blood group genetics and immunohematology to the study of blood group antigen expression and the impact on immune-mediated hemolytic disorders. Connect with Dr. Denomme on LinkedIn.

Dr. Denomme finds academic writing an important and necessary exercise for a few reasons. First and foremost, it trains the mind to organize thoughts in a logical fashion that can be understood by the scientific public. Second, academic publishing flows from academic writing, with peer-review feedback which is vital to academic growth. Finally, challenging oneself by writing editorials, topic-specific reviews, book chapters, etc. is another academic growth opportunity. He thinks academic writing sharpens one’s expertise which is valuable to mentor young professional colleagues in the field. He prefers to set a block of time committing to academic writing rather than making it a daily exercise.

In order to ensure the writing is up-to-date and can give new insights to the field of research, Dr. Denomme signs up to several journals for having the Table of Contents delivered to his email. Also, early in his career, he asked his mentors to give his name as an alternate to review manuscripts.

Speaking of the importance of Conflict of Interest (COI) disclosure, Dr. Denomme believes research funding agencies have provided guidelines to address potential COIs. Consulting opportunities must be evaluated for its impact to the research before agreements are signed. In this way, COI should not be able to influence the research. Yet, he points out that an annual review of current consultations should be made to identify the COIs that may arise as an investigator’s research evolves.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)