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

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)