In 2025, 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 (2025)

Matthew Holt, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, UK

Rounak Dubey, AIIMS Nagpur, India

Wolfgang Rennert, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, USA

Hadley Pfalzgraf, George Washington University, USA

Mohammad Sunoqrot, Inova Health System, USA

Ping Hui, Macao Blood Transfusion Services (MBTS), Macao, China

Andrey Sudarikov, National Medical Research Center for Hematology, Russia

Richard C. Godby, Mayo Clinic, USA

Gerhard Zugmaier, Amgen Research (Munich) GmbH, Germany

J. Peter R. Pelletier, University of Florida, USA

James R. Knowles, Plasma Protein Therapeutics Association (PPTA), USA

Joshua G. Rivenbark, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA

Outstanding Author

Matthew Holt

Dr. Matthew Holt is a Clinical Research Fellow working with the University of Leeds and Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust in the Paroxysmal Nocturnal Haemoglobinuria (PNH) National Service. He obtained his MBChB from the University of Edinburgh in 2014 and has been working as a Haematology Specialist Registrar in the West Yorkshire region since 2018. Dr. Holt is currently pursuing a PhD focused on breakthrough haemolysis in PNH, with a particular interest in the role of complement regulators. His research explores factors driving breakthrough haemolysis in patients on complement inhibitors aiming to improve outcomes and therapeutic decisions. Working with the PNH Research Tissue Bank and National PNH Service gives him unique access to patients with PNH nationwide. Alongside his academic work, Dr. Holt remains actively involved in clinical haematology.

AOB: From your point of view, why do we need academic writing?

Dr. Holt: Academic writing is fundamental to the advancement of medical knowledge, providing a structured means of disseminating research findings to the wider scientific and medical communities. It ensures that new discoveries build on existing knowledge, limiting unnecessary duplication of work, which can be subjected to appropriate peer review and critical evaluation. In medicine, this process is particularly vital as it underpins the development of evidence-based guidelines that improve and standardise patient care.

AOB: How to avoid biases in one’s writing?

Dr. Holt: Avoiding bias in academic writing requires the writer to be impartial to the outcomes of the research whilst being transparent with their methodology and findings. Bias can be reduced by collaborating with co-authors to incorporate different perspectives and allow for collective critical evaluation of findings before publication. Bias can also be mitigated through the use of standardised reporting guidelines. Finally, publishing through a peer-reviewed journal strengthens the credibility of research by subjecting it to independent scrutiny.

AOB: From an author’s perspective, do you think it is important to follow reporting guidelines (e.g. PRISMA, STARD and CARE) during preparation of manuscripts?

Dr. Holt: The use of reporting guidelines in academic writing provides a structured framework for writers to follow. They standardise the presentation of research findings and ensure key methodological details are included, reducing bias and improving clarity. This promotes consistency across the scientific community, allowing for better comparison and reproducibility of results. For authors, adhering to reporting guidelines streamlines the peer-review process and increases the likelihood of publication.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Rounak Dubey

Dr. Rounak Dubey is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Transfusion Medicine at AIIMS Nagpur, India, where he also serves as the Deputy Medical Superintendent, overseeing both administrative and clinical operations. He holds an MBBS, MD, and DNB in Transfusion Medicine, with training in clinical hematology, which has laid the foundation for his expertise and interest in clinical transfusion, patient blood management (PBM), and data informatics. With extensive experience in academia and clinical practice, Dr. Dubey has held teaching and research roles at several leading institutions across India and served in the Indian Armed Forces for seven years, further broadening his perspective on healthcare delivery. His work consistently integrates evidence-based methodologies to drive improvements in patient care and operational efficiency. As a recipient of prestigious accolades, including the ISBT Young Transfusion Researcher Fellowship and the DNB gold medal, his current research focuses on developing AI-driven clinical decision support systems in transfusion medicine. He is an active contributor to the scientific community, serving as an editor, reviewer, and member of multiple international scientific societies. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

The way Dr. Dubey sees it, academic writing is the backbone of scientific progress and the blueprint that guides innovation. Each research paper builds on the work that came before, establishing a robust framework of evidence and knowledge. In an age in which we are constantly bombarded with information, he believes that these carefully vetted publications serve as our trusted navigational beacons, especially in critical areas like healthcare and the life sciences. Upholding high standards and ethical practices ensures that the trust placed in our research not only endures but also paves the way for future breakthroughs.

In Dr. Dubey’s view, in today’s rapidly changing landscape, it is not enough to be a specialist in one’s own niche, but to be an explorer across disciplines. He keeps up with the latest developments through scientific journals and leveraging innovative tools like social media and Artificial Intelligence. He explains, “These help me identify emerging trends and breakthroughs in real time, enabling me to integrate fresh perspectives and insights into my work. This proactive approach not only keeps my writing current but also positions it at the forefront of scientific discourse.”

In addition, Dr. Dubey reckons that transparency is key in academic writing. Thus, disclosing any potential conflicts of interest is essential for ensuring the credibility of the research. When authors openly declare any affiliations or financial ties that might influence their findings, it allows readers to evaluate the work with full context. “This practice isn’t just a mere formality. It’s fundamental to maintaining trust in the scientific process,” adds he.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Wolfgang Rennert

Wolfgang Rennert, MD, PhD, DTM+H, is the Professor of Pediatrics in the Department of Pediatrics at MedStar Georgetown University, Medical Director for Bone Marrow Harvests  at the Blood and Marrow Collection Program at MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, and Medical Director at the Rostropovich Vishnevskaya Foundation in Washington, D.C. He graduated from the Albert Ludwig University School of Medicine in Freiburg, Germany, in 1982, followed by a research doctorate at the same university in 1985. He received postgraduate residency training in anesthesia, general surgery and internal medicine in Berlin, Germany, from 1983-1988, and in pediatrics at Georgetown University in Washington from 1992-1995, followed by a chief residency in 1996. From 1996-2001, he worked as pediatrician and pediatric nephrologist at the Chris Hani Baragwanath Hospital in Soweto, South Africa. In 2001, he returned to Georgetown University, where he directed the residency program in pediatrics from 2002-2014. He became the Medical Director for the Rostropovich Vishnevskaya Foundation in 2016, coordinating national vaccination and global health programs in Palestine, Russia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Egypt and Georgia. Since 2019, he is directing the bone marrow harvest program at MedStar Georgetown University Hospital. He has built the program into the largest collection center for stem cell transplants in the US with more than 250 bone marrow harvests annually. He has published widely on topics ranging from HIV to nephrology, stem cell harvesting and global health, and has received multiple teaching and service awards.

The way Dr. Rennert sees it, the generation, review and study of academic manuscripts turn individual scientists and clinicians into a community of learners. Learning from each other’s experiences enriches and enhances the body of knowledge more than any one individual would be able to do on their own. In addition, the generation of scientific manuscripts imposes on the authors a set of guidelines and rules that foster methodological rigor and care applied to the generation, analysis, and interpretation of data. These are what make academic writing so essential.

Speaking of how writers can avoid biases in their writing, Dr. Rennert says, “The focus of our work must be the generation of knowledge and not the advancement of any individual’s point of view.” To him, the rigorous application of scientific methodology to the data generated by clinical or scientific studies and a careful review of data presented by experts and reviewers of the subject matter allow for the reduction and control of bias. Authors themselves must develop a certain detachment from their work to focus their attention on what is rather than on what they desire. Theory must follow the facts and not the other way round.

From an author’s perspective, Dr. Rennert points out two advantages of the application of reporting guidelines (such as STROBE and PRISMA). First, the guidelines allow authors to collect their thoughts and structure their data presentation in a way that clarifies what is being looked at, which methodology of investigation is the appropriate one for the problem under investigation, and how the generated data should be presented. It also allows readers to understand the presented data as it follows a framework of analysis and presentation that is shared by both the producers and consumers of the data.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Hadley Pfalzgraf

Dr. Hadley Pfalzgraf is a second year OBGYN resident at George Washington University, where she is completing a curricular track in quality improvement and safety, and has been recently selected for the position of research chief within her residency program. She obtained her BA with honors from Northwestern University in 2018, followed by a one-year fellowship at University College Cork in Ireland, where she completed her master’s degree in neuroscience research funded by the Mitchell Scholarship. She obtained her medical degree with distinction in research from Albert Einstein College of Medicine in 2024, where she focused on women’s health research. Her research interests include maternal mortality and morbidity during childbirth, particularly in underserved populations, with a goal to make childbirth safer in the US. She plans to complete a fellowship in Maternal Fetal Medicine following her residency training.

In Dr. Pfalzgraf’s view, the most essential elements of good academic paper are a clear research question, concise language, and the presentation of the figures. A clear research question is imperative to help guide the rest of the publication and serves as a guidepost to return to throughout the paper. Additionally, breaking down complex topics into concise, easy to understand language demonstrates not only the author’s command of the subject area but aids in a reader’s comprehension. While many readers will be from the field of publication, a good academic paper can be read and understood by those not in the field of interest. Finally, as previous mentors have impressed upon her, the figures in an academic paper should tell a story and be easily understood without the main text. While not required in narrative review articles, figures are important tools for data presentation and comparison. The captions should help guide the readers through the figures in a systematic way that serves to highlight key findings.

During preparation of a paper, Dr. Pfalzgraf believes that researching and selecting potential journals prior to submission is critical in determining the format, length, and deadlines. Starting with an outline and a draft deadline well in advance of the final deadline are helpful as preparing a publication typically takes longer than anticipated with multiple rounds of revision. A significant aspect of preparation is review of related literature. It is important to read broadly and extensively to have a more thorough understanding of a topic before narrowing – this will help with the writing process and the selection of the appropriate language to describe specific topics. She explains, “For example, before writing a narrative review on autotransfusion in obstetrics, I first had to develop a broader understanding of how cell salvage technology was developed and how it’s used in other specialties. This background knowledge allowed for higher level discussion of relevant applications in obstetrics.”

“As an obstetrician, I believe it’s important to disseminate research to broad audiences, including anesthesiologists and hematologists with whom we work closely on labor and delivery. In medicine, it is easy to become siloed into our respective fields, but I hope to foster communication and collaboration with this publication in AOB. As an OBGYN, I recognize that I am not an expert in autotransfusion and look forward to the input and ideas from providers with other perspectives,” says Dr. Pfalzgraf.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Mohammad Sunoqrot

Dr. Mohammad Sunoqrot is a physician and clinical research scholar affiliated with Inova Health System and Palestine Polytechnic University. He earned his medical degree from Cairo University and focuses his research on blood-related and thrombotic disorders with an emphasis on improving patient health outcomes. At Inova, he has contributed to clinical projects optimizing anemia management and antifibrinolytic therapies across diverse populations, leveraging large datasets to refine patient care protocols. He possesses extensive experience in systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and multi-center studies, complemented by strong expertise in data management and statistical analysis using REDCap, SPSS, R, and Stata. During his training at Johns Hopkins Medicine, Dr. Sunoqrot gained valuable experience in clinical trial coordination and translational research focused on coagulation and thrombotic conditions. He is dedicated to advancing evidence-based medicine through interdisciplinary collaboration and global health initiatives. Follow him on Google Scholar and LinkedIn.

Academic writing is vital in science, according to Dr. Sunoqrot, for communicating research findings, methodologies, and interpretations clearly and accurately. It allows scientists and clinicians to share knowledge, enabling others to replicate studies, validate results, and apply discoveries in clinical or practical settings. Through academic writing, evidence is presented systematically, fostering transparency, critical evaluation, and collaboration across disciplines. This exchange of information drives scientific progress and informs evidence-based practices that ultimately improve health outcomes.

In Dr. Sunoqrot’s opinion, critical writing involves analyzing and evaluating evidence rather than just describing it. To write critically, one should assess the strengths and limitations of research, question assumptions, compare different perspectives, and synthesize findings to build a coherent argument. Clarity, logical reasoning, and supporting claims with reliable evidence are keys. Maintaining an objective tone while highlighting gaps or controversies helps produce thoughtful and impactful scientific writing.

In addition, Dr. Sunoqrot points out that obtaining institutional review board (IRB) approval is like setting the ethical compass for any research involving human participants—it ensures the study respects the rights, dignity, and safety of the participants throughout the process. The IRB acts as a guardian, carefully reviewing protocols to minimize risks and guarantee that the informed consent is truly informed. Skipping this crucial step is like navigating uncharted water without a map: it risks exposing participants to harm, invites legal and ethical violations, and can lead to the research being dismissed by the scientific community. Ultimately, without IRB oversight, the trust that underpins the relationship between researchers and participants—and by extension, public trust in science—can be irreparably damaged.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Ping Hui

Dr. Ping Hui is the director of Macao Blood Transfusion Services (MBTS) and has been working in MBTS for more than 26 years. She obtained her medicine degree in 1988 from Jinan University in Guangzhou, China and was qualified as a hematologist in 1999 with training both locally and in the UK. She has been working as a Hematologic Consultant in MBTS since 2015. She got a master degree in Public Management at Beijing University in 2013. She has developed interests in clinical transfusion, immunohematology and automation in blood services. Meanwhile, she is focused on optimizing the collection and use of blood products for the growing of Macau Health System.

To become a successful author, Dr. Hui believes that one needs to possess a diverse set of key skills, which consist of creative, technical, intellectual, and practical abilities. As the digital landscape evolves, so do the tools designed to aid the writing process, from sophisticated word processors to content management systems. Familiarity with these tools can enhance efficiency, organization, and collaboration, especially when working with editors and other stakeholders. Clear and effective communication is a timeless skill for writers. With the proliferation of communication channels, writers must convey their ideas succinctly and persuasively across various formats. This skill is essential for pitching to publishers, collaborating with teams, and engaging with audiences. In addition, the ability to source accurate information and provide factual content is more important than ever to avoid the widespread of misinformation.

Avoiding bias in writing, in Dr. Hui’s view, requires conscious effort, as biases can subtly creep into word choice, framing, evidence selection, and assumptions.

• Cultivate self-awareness: Tools like Implicit Association Tests (IATs) can be illuminating.
• Clearly define key concepts to ensure readers understand your specific meaning.
• Employ rigorous research and evidence: seek out credible sources representing multiple perspectives.
• Evaluate source credibility: prioritize peer-reviewed research, primary sources, and reputable institutions.
• Represent data fairly: present statistics accurately and in context. Avoid misleading graphs or selectively reporting data. Acknowledge limitations in the data or research.
• Distinguish fact from opinion: Clearly label opinions, interpretations, and conclusions as such.
• Context is crucial: provide sufficient background and context so readers understand the full picture, not just a snippet that supports a particular angle.
• Diverse feedback: Ask beta readers or editors from different backgrounds, rather than yourself, to review your work.

One may significantly reduce bias and produce writing that is more credible, respectful, and impactful by applying the above strategies.

“I am motivated to write by a combination of curiosity, professional responsibility, and the desire to contribute to knowledge,” says Dr. Hui.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Andrey Sudarikov

Andrey Sudarikov, Ph.D., DrSci., is the Head of the Molecular Genetics Department at the National Medical Research Center for Hematology in Moscow, Russia. This department encompasses clinical units that provide molecular diagnostics for oncology and hereditary diseases, as well as research units dedicated to advancing knowledge in these areas. He focuses on developing new, effective molecular tests for diagnosing hematological disorders and conducting clinical research on new diagnostic and prognostic criteria for leukemia and lymphoma. He is also exploring the association between somatic and hereditary molecular markers and therapy resistance or recurrence of the disease. He teaches and trains students and residents in molecular diagnostics methods. He has supervised over 25 Ph.D. theses. He serves as an expert for the Russian Science Foundation and as a reviewer for various scientific journals.

Dr. Sudarikov believes a good article is the most cited one. At the same time, the types of articles are very diverse in terms of the amount of resources expended and the data obtained. All articles are probably required if research is conducted competently and the data is approached with an open mind. In any case, a highly cited article is based on previous, possibly less cited ones. Therefore, the absence of restrictions in the publication of data, including negative or ambiguously interpreted data, is important for the development of science.

Dr. Sudarikov points out the following qualities that an author should possess. A healthy curiosity and willingness to see something different from what one expected. The experimenter's skills and open-minded approach to interpreting the results are also essential. Ensuring no conflict of interest in the research process is important.

“This is my first time publishing with AOB, but I am really impressed with how thorough and specific the review process is. It is not often that I come across such pickiness, but at the same time, the helpfulness of the reviewers’ comments,” says Dr. Sudarikov.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Richard C. Godby

Dr. Richard Godby is a hematologist with a clinical focus on classical hematology, immunohematology, transfusion medicine, iron disorders, and rare diseases. He is board-certified in internal medicine, hematology, medical oncology, transfusion medicine, and blood banking. His academic interests encompass medical education, quality improvement, and systems-based hematology.

According to Dr. Godby, a strong academic paper starts with a relevant question. The answer—whether it confirms or denies the hypothesis—is valuable to a broad audience. Therefore, the paper should be written in a way that is accessible to many readers and emphasizes its importance. Summarizing key findings with clear figures and tables aids in quick comprehension and can foster discussions among colleagues.

When working on a project or paper, it can be beneficial to consider it as a chapter in a larger narrative. Dr. Godby explains that if researchers understand both previous relevant work and the future directions of the field, it will help them contextualize their current projects. The work being done is often influenced by what has already been accomplished and is expected to impact future research by others.

“I deeply admire those who contribute to our collective scientific knowledge. From basic science research to illustrative review articles, the ability to teach and communicate to a diverse audience is an impactful skill set necessary for moving us all forward,” says Dr. Godby.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Gerhard Zugmaier

Dr. Gerhard Zugmaier earned his initial Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) degree in 1982 from Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen, followed by a second M.D. in 1986 from the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, where he specialized in autocrine and paracrine growth factors in breast cancer. In 1990, he completed a Medical Fellowship in Oncology and Cancer Biology at Georgetown University. His credentials were further solidified by passing the US board examination in Washington, DC, in 1991 and achieving board certification as a Hematologist and Medical Oncologist in 2001. He established T-cell engagers for autoimmune diseases and successfully treated the first six patients, all of whom showed a positive response. He played a key role in the development of the two ISS protocols and was instrumental in the development of the 562 protocol in 2025. The approval of the T-cell engager blinatumomab involves the following indication: BLINCYTO is a bispecific CD19-directed CD3 T-cell engager indicated for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients aged one month and older with CD19-positive, Philadelphia chromosome-negative B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) during the consolidation phase of multi-phase chemotherapy.

AOB: What role does academic writing play in science?

Dr. Zugmaier: The physicist Werner Heisenberg once said, "Science arises in conversations." In our globalized world, this statement has never been more accurate or more significant. Conversations, both verbal and written, have become the prerequisite of scientific progress.

AOB: Academic writing takes a lot of time and effort. What motivates you to do so?

Dr. Zugmaier: Written communication, in particular, serves as a crucial form of conversation among our widespread scientific community. It enables rapid transfer of essential messages, ensuring that insights and discoveries in mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, computer science, and medicine can be shared and built upon quickly. In medicine, the importance of these messages cannot be overstated, as they can genuinely be lifesaving. For example, the key message of my research on immune therapy is the potential to cure cancer by eliminating the resistant remainder that does not respond to conventional treatment. While conventional treatment can often reduce tumor size, it is the refractory remainder that leads to relapse and, ultimately, death. Communicating these insights effectively within our community is vital for advancing our understanding and treatment of such complex issues.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

J. Peter R. Pelletier

Joseph Peter Ray Pelletier, MD, FCAP, FASCP, is a Clinical Professor in the Departments of Pathology and Anesthesia at the College of Medicine of the University of Florida, where he also serves as Medical Director of Transfusion Services and Program Director for the Transfusion Medicine Fellowship. A retired U.S. Air Force Colonel, Dr. Pelletier has over three decades of experience in transfusion medicine, pathology, and clinical leadership. His research focuses on pathogen reduction technologies, blood component storage, massive transfusion protocols, and patient blood management in trauma and obstetric care. He has served as co-investigator on numerous Department of Defense and NIH-funded clinical trials and holds a U.S. provisional patent for improving blood product stability. Widely published and recognized with multiple national and institutional awards, Dr. Pelletier continues to advance transfusion safety, innovation, and education at UF Health and within the broader medical community. Learn more about Dr. Pelletier here.

In Dr. Pelletier’s view, critical thinking involves looking at both sides of the argument. An author should have at least 5 resources supporting each side of the issue. When evaluating research, it is best to have randomized prospective studies. If this is not available, cohort matched retrospective studies may be performed. The studies should have outcomes for evaluation and comparison.

On the other hand, Dr. Pelletier highlights that conflicts of interest (COI) disclosure is important to reveal real or perceived biases, especially when involving medical equipment, supplies or medication. If a person has COI, he/she may be influenced, and professional judgement impairment may lead to personal gain as in instead of placing the interest of patients’ health first, they may choose to increase their own wealth.

“Academic writing is not only for my colleagues but for myself as well. Doing research and writing summaries allow me to dwell more deeply into subjects, get a better understanding of the issues, treatments and results. I can then provide better patient care and teach residents and fellows to also give better patient care,” says Dr. Pelletier.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

James R. Knowles

Dr. James R. Knowles currently leads the Global Regulatory and Scientific teams that provide regulatory expertise and interpretation and strategic direction to the plasma-derived therapy (PDT) industry. Specifically, he oversees the regulatory, scientific and medical affairs activities of the Association, covering the US, EU, China and all other global geographic regions. In addition, he interacts with and supports the Association's members from both the plasma collection and manufacturing CMC businesses. Dr. Knowles has nearly twenty years of PDMP industry experience and knowledge while working for a global biopharmaceutical firm, specifically overseeing Quality Control, Quality and Regulatory Compliance and Global Regulatory Affairs for both the manufacturing and plasma collection businesses. He had previous collaborations with PPTA, where he serves on the US, EU and Global Regulatory Committees of the PPTA, contributing to the strategic pathway of the Association in recent years. He holds a Ph.D. in Microbiology from London South Bank University, and a bachelor’s degree in environmental science from Lincoln University (UK). Connect with him on LinkedIn.

AOB: What are the key skill sets of an author?

Dr. Knowles: The ability to articulate the story of the particular topic, regardless of technical and/or scientific complexity. This not only keeps the readers engaged, but provides an improved learning experience for anyone not familiar with the topic. Due diligence in research, whether that is actual research that generates new scientific evidence or research into existing literature for review articles, is critical. The readers should be able to feel that this article has been undertaken with the deepest level of diligence. I also think being efficient with the writing and language is important to quickly distill down complicated topics. Finally, integrity in the development of a manuscript is key and leads to objectionable writing.

AOB: How to avoid biases in one’s writing?

Dr. Knowles: As a member of an industry association, it is our responsibility to ensure objectionable thinking, especially when in dialogue with regulators. As a scientist and as part of my training in my PhD, I have been trained to remain impartial on topics until the data and/or information suggest a particular path of evidential thinking and as stated above, integrity of writing style is critical. As an author of a technical topic, your role is not to introduce bias or emotional thinking to the readers; it is to present the facts and let the readers decide on the outcome based on their understanding.

AOB: Academic writing takes a lot of time and effort. What motivates you to do so?

Dr. Knowles: The number one motivation, whether that is through academic writing or verbal presentation is my enjoyment to teach and inform about something I am passionate about. I have been fortunate enough to be in the PDMP industry for nearly 20 years and yet I know it is still a very unique and therefore less-understood industry within the scope of biopharmaceuticals. Having a platform to be able to educate, whether that is for regulatory change or simply advertising the facts about our industry, is my primary motivation.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Joshua G. Rivenbark

Dr. Joshua G. Rivenbark, MD, PhD, is a Hematology fellow and health services researcher at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He received his MD and PhD in Public Policy from Duke University, and he completed his Internal Medicine residency training at University of Pennsylvania in the ABIM Research Pathway before joining the Hematology fellowship program at UNC. He is broadly interested in how social inequities and policies drive inequities in health, and what can be done to mitigate these effects. In fellowship, his research has focused on using population-level data such as insurance claims and patient registries to examine health care for people with sickle cell disease, with a particular focus on access to comprehensive care and people with sickle cell disease who do not receive health care at a sickle cell center. Learn more about his work here.

AOB: What are the essential elements of a good academic paper?

Dr. Rivenbark: For an original research article, I think the critical elements are a clear research question, data and analyses that can adequately address the question, and conclusions that appropriately reflect the findings while accounting for limitations in the study design. For reviews, I think it’s helpful to have a fairly focused scope and highlight the findings as clearly as possible, because future researchers will often be looking to these types of papers for specific information on a topic.

AOB: What authors have to bear in mind during preparation of a paper?

Dr. Rivenbark: Well I guess I’d say to keep the essential elements from the last question in mind! Other than that… This might be a little in the weeds of writing, but something I learned from my graduate school mentor was how helpful it is for future readers if you write with a parallel structure throughout a paper. So if, say, your research question is broken down into 3 components, (A), (B), and (C), establish the research gaps in that A-B-C order in the introduction, report your methods and results in the A-B-C order, and discuss each point in that order too (subheadings help a lot). It really helps readers keep track of what you’re doing and why, and it makes it easier to find specific pieces of information. I try to do this as much as possible in my writing.

AOB: Why do you choose to publish in AOB?

Dr. Rivenbark: My co-authors and I were honored to receive an invitation to contribute to AOB’s Adult Sickle Cell Disease special series. We’re happy to see continued growing interest and resources devoted toward sickle cell disease from the hematology community at large.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)