In 2023, many TAU 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 (2023)

Darren J. Bryk, Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, USA

Shingo Hatakeyama, Hirosaki University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan

Ivo I. de Vos, Department of Urology, Erasmus University Medical Center, The Netherlands

Joshua Sterling, Department of Urology, Yale School of Medicine, USA

Bodie Chislett, Austin Health, Australia

Patrick-Julien Treacy, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Australia

Katharina Beyer, Erasmus MC, Netherlands

Taekmin Kwon, Ulsan University Hospital, Korea & Sungwoo Hong, Dr. Jomulju Urology Clinic, Korea

Masato Uetani, Toho University, Japan

Judith C. Hagedorn, University of Washington, USA

Alexander T. Rozanski, UT Health San Antonio, USA

Muhammed A. M. Hammad, University of California, USA

Lindsay A. Hampson, University of California San Francisco, USA

Juan Chipollini, University of Arizona, USA

Sonia Pérez-Bertólez, Hospital Sant Joan de Déu, Spain

Yozo Mitsui, Toho University, Japan

Rachel A. Mann, University of Minnesota, USA

Alexandre Rouen, Reference Center for Rare Hypersomnias, France

Fumihiko Urabe, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Japan

Daniel A. Wollin, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, USA

Venkat M. Ramakrishnan, Boston Children’s Hospital, USA

Ryan P. Smith, University of Virginia School of Medicine, USA

Katie S. Murray, NYU Langone Medical Center, USA

Parth Thakker, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, USA

William Harrison, Toowoomba Hospital, Australia

Antony Pellegrino, University of Illinois at Chicago, USA

Lisa J. Kroon, Maasstad Hospital, The Netherlands

Sopark Manasnayakorn, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand

Sehwan Kim, Dankook University, South Korea

Omar Safar, Armed Forces Hospital Southern Region, Saudi Arabia

Laura Zuluaga, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, USA

Gregory P. Murphy, Washington University School of Medicine, USA

Nicholas M. Donin, University of California, USA

Gilad Karavani, University of Toronto, Canada

Andries Van Huele, Ghent University Hospital, Belgium

Joseph Gabriel, Royal Surrey County Hospital, UK

Outstanding Author

Darren J. Bryk

Dr. Darren J. Bryk is currently a Clinical Instructor and the Andrology fellow at the University of Virginia, US, graduating in June 2023. He graduated from NYU School of Medicine in 2016 and Cleveland Clinic Urology Residency in 2022. Following fellowship, he plans to move to South Florida and will be joining Urology Medical Specialists (https://urologyfl.com/) in September 2023. Dr. Bryk’s clinical and academic interests include male factor infertility, erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction, Peyronie’s disease, hypogonadism, male voiding dysfunction, prosthetic urology, urethral reconstruction and vasectomies. Connect with Dr. Bryk on Twitter.

Speaking of the skill sets for being an academic author, Dr. Bryk believes that authors should be patient and with open-mindedness. In creating and then completing a research project, an author must allow the process to develop over time and persevere through obstacles that will most definitely arise. Further, when an author is open to the ideas and critiques of other partners and colleagues, they can produce clinically impactful research.

Dr. Bryk further shares how he avoids biases in his own writing. He would imagine the way a reader interprets the manuscript and try to ensure that they would be able to make the same conclusions, while also provide constructive criticism. When he has completed a project, he would ask himself, “Do the data that I have shown in this manuscript support the conclusions that I have made?” This allows him to impartially assess his writing.

Regarding the need to seek institutional review board (IRB) approval for original research, Dr. Bryk thinks it is important to allow ethically-based research. All researchers should have the best interests of their subjects in mind and the IRB ensures that all aspects of a research project protect the study participants. He is regretful that we have seen the effects of studies that have been performed without an ethics committee’s approval many times over the last century, with devastating effects to the study participants. He adds, “We all know how important research is. Advancing scientific progress helps not only academic healthcare professionals but also for all clinical providers throughout the world to provide better care to their patients. The work of academic writers is invaluable.”

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Shingo Hatakeyama

Dr. Shingo Hatakeyama is currently the Associate Professor at the Department of Urology, Hirosaki University School of Medicine, Hirosaki, Japan. He received his medical degree from the Akita University, Japan, in 2000. He completed the residency in urology at the Akita University Hospital. Thereafter, he served as a research fellow from 2006 to 2008 in La Jolla, CA, USA. During his fellowship, he focused on research in the field of molecular biology and glycobiology. He once served as the Assistant Professor at the Department of Urology, Hirosaki University School of Medicine, from 2008 to 2019. During that period, he gained extensive experience in the surgical treatment of urological cancers, including prostate cancer, bladder cancer and kidney cancer. His field of professional and areas of research interests are as follows: Urology (lower urinary tract symptoms, urinary stone disease), Urologic Oncology (renal cancer, urothelial cancer, testicular cancer and prostate cancer), Surgery (robotic surgery, laparoscopic surgery and open surgery), Kidney Transplantation, Glycobiology and Clinical Statistics. He has published over 300 scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals and has presented his research at national and international conferences. Dr. Hatakeyama is also a member of several professional organizations, including the Japanese Urological Association and the European Association of Urology. Connect with Dr. Hatakeyama on Twitter.

Academic writing, in Dr. Hatakeyama’s opinion, plays a crucial role in science as it is the primary way researchers and scientists communicate with each other. He explains, “Overall, it plays a vital role in the scientific progress as it promotes the sharing, building, and advancing of scientific knowledge to improve the future.” He further points out the key approach to keep writing up-to-date is to collaborate with experts from the field. In the writing and review process, one can also update one’s own knowledge as collaboration allows writers to tap into others’ knowledge and expertise for new insights. The ability to continually learn, access diverse sources, collaborate with experts, and receive regular updates allows one to ensure that the writing is current and able to bring new insights to the field of research.

Speaking of the need for authors to disclose Conflict of Interest (COI), Dr. Hatakeyama emphasizes it is important for authors to disclose properly for any potential COI in the research publications. He explains, “Having a COI is not a problem itself. It is important to disclose it.” The extent to which a COI can influence a research depends on the nature of the conflict and the research itself. A COI arises when an author has financial, personal, or professional interests that could potentially influence the research findings, data interpretation, or conclusions. In areas related to market principles, such as new drug development, a COI may have a significant impact on the research findings. He believes disclosing COI 1) promotes transparency in research and helps readers understand any potential biases that may have influenced the research findings, 2) enhances the credibility of the research and the researchers themselves, as it demonstrates their commitment to ethical standards and scientific integrity, and 3) builds trust between researchers and the public, as it shows that researchers are open and honest about any potential biases that may have influenced their research.

Dr. Hatakeyama is satisfied with the questing for knowledge in the process of writing. He believes knowledge is the weapon of humanity leading to a fair and fortunate future. And it is this belief that keeps motivating him to continue as an academic writer.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Ivo I. de Vos

Ivo I. de Vos graduated from the medical school of Leiden University and is currently pursuing a PhD at the Department of Urology in Rotterdam's Erasmus Medical Centre, the Netherlands. He is working under the guidance of Prof. Monique J. Roobol, focusing on prostate cancer screening, diagnostics, and active surveillance. Using clinical data, he is collaborating with his research group to develop and analyze multivariable risk stratification strategies in prostate cancer, which can assist in informed decision making and improve oncological outcomes. Learn more about Dr. I. de Vos from here.

Speaking of the key skill sets for an academic writer, Dr. I. de Vos thinks one should possess qualities such as intellectual curiosity, critical thinking, and the ability to present the findings in an objective and unbiased manner. Additionally, he points out an academic writer should try to develop a strong argument while still writing in a clear and concise manner in order to effectively communicate the argument to the readers. Ultimately, while individual skill sets and qualities are important for academic writing, he believes that the ability to work effectively as a team is essential for producing high-quality research and writing.

In the process of writing, Dr. I. de Vos thinks it is important to be aware of one’s own personal biases and to actively seek out diverse perspectives and sources. In addition, he thinks authors should strive to present evidence objectively, avoid making assumptions or generalizations, and be open to feedback and criticism.

Regarding the importance of applying approval from the institutional review board (IRB) for a research, Dr. I. de Vos emphasizes the IRB is vital in ensuring the study is conducted with integrity and the safety of participants is protected. He further elaborates, “Omitting this process could result in harm to participants, legal consequences, and the invalidation of the study's findings. Ethical approval is an essential part of the research process and should not be overlooked or ignored.”

Finally, Dr. I. de Vos shares that he believes by working collaboratively with other researchers and healthcare professionals, new insights and solutions can be brought to complex challenges, and making a real difference to patient’s lives. He encourages peers to keep this in mind and never underestimate the power of teamwork in achieving the goals.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Joshua Sterling

Joshua Sterling, MD, is an Assistant Professor of Urology specializing in trauma and genitourinary reconstruction at Yale School of Medicine, USA. He completed a GURS fellowship in Reconstructive Urology and Transgender Care at SUNY Upstate Medical University. He earned his medical degree from New York Medical College and completed his urologic residency at Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital. His clinical areas of interest are urethral and ureteral strictures, genitourinary fistulae, urinary complications of radiation, and genital gender affirming surgery. His research interests focus on stricture formation, tissue regeneration, and the effect of sex and gender on health care outcomes. He is the author of over 50 peer-reviewed manuscripts and book chapters and is a co-author of the American Urologic Association core curriculum on Gender Affirming Surgery.

Speaking of tips on the preparation of a manuscript, Dr. Sterling thinks it should be fairly formulaic: report the results, ask yourself if the results are concordant or discordant with the hypothesis and why, and finally what is the clinical context or impact of these results. As authors and physicians, he thinks the focus and concern should be on the study design. During this phase designers have to keep in mind the clinical problem. Again, keep asking yourself: What is the specific question this study will answer? What is the best way to answer the question? What is the most realistic way to answer the question given real world constraints in time, money and manpower? He further points out that switching the emphasis from the preparation of the paper to the preparation of the study would mean we are reviewing studies based on their design not just on the results, which then creates an important space to publish negative results. With the belief that the job as a physician is not only treating today’s patients, but also trying to improve and advance that treatment for tomorrow’s patients. This is the motivation for him to keep writing and publishing.

While Dr. Sterling does not know that it is possible for a human to write something that is without any biases, he believes the focus should be on making the design phase clear and transparent. This allows the biases, which will always exist, to be out in the open and we as a community can have a conversation about how those biases may or may not have had an impact on the results. And he reminds us that following reporting guidelines (e.g. CONSORT, PRISMA, etc.) is very important because it keeps everyone speaking the same language, which allows for collaboration across groups and comparisons across different studies.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Bodie Chislett

Dr. Bodie Chislett (MBBS-hons) is an honorary clinical research fellow at Austin Health Department of Urology, Melbourne, Australia. Graduating from Monash University, he launched his career into clinical research with a focus on Men’s Health. Having completed his residency at Austin Health, he currently splits his time between clinical practice and research under the tutelage of Prof. Damien Bolton, Prof. David Webb, A/Prof. Joseph Ischia and A/ Prof Lih-Ming Wong. His current interests are focused on the integration of artificial intelligence into clinical practice, expanding the use of serial imaging in prostate cancer, and improving the management of complex neurogenic patients. Connect with Dr. Chislett on Twitter and LinkedIn.

Evidence synthesis is critical to academic writing. “The most important step in evidence synthesis,” says Dr. Chislett, “is complete comprehension of your clinical question. Through understanding, a targeted and detailed review is easier and more relevant. This foundational step allows for a complete examination of the existing body of knowledge, while allowing for the exploration of future areas of research.” And he affirms that such strategy of evidence synthesis should always be augmented by the clinician’s clinical appraisal of the literature.

Also, academic writing always comes with kinds of difficulties. Dr. Chislett thinks that difficulties arise during all stages of manuscript development, from the conception to the final editing process. The most common difficulty of his short career to date is the ‘blank page’, where to start and how their goals can be achieved. Clarity and organisation is often the answer to all problems that arise.

One interesting story strikes Dr. Chislett’s mind during his writing, “The most recent manuscript published with TAU, one of the supervising authors and myself were in regular correspondence regarding final edits. Surprisingly, throughout our correspondence, we operated under the assumption we lived 2000km apart. However, it wasn’t until the day we submitted the manuscript did I come to realize he was working at the same small regional hospital, mere meters away.”

Talking about the importance of data sharing in scientific writing, Dr. Chislett holds that sharing clinical data is paramount for the purpose of gaining larger retrospective cohorts, and to advance various domains of research. However, this act of sharing is contingent upon different situations. He adds, “Given the heavy, and often arduous, burden of data collection, the decision to share research data should be judicious, taking into consideration various factors, and preferable after the completion of the principal project.”

(by Inga Chung, Brad Li)

Patrick-Julien Treacy

Dr. Patrick-Julien Treacy is a urologist specialized in uro-oncology and robotics surgery. After graduating from Toulouse Medical School in France, Treacy received urology training in Nice University Hospital. During the training, he took a year off to achieve his master’s degree in oncology and do a research fellowship in New York at Mount Sinai Hospital. Dr. Treacy was working in Dr. Ash Tewari’s unit, developing the multiphoton imaging studies on fresh bladder tissues as well as fixed prostate biopsies. Their research focusing on the impact of tumor micro-environement genomics has led to a recent publication. He finished his urology with 1 year in Paoli Calmettes Institute and Toulouse University Hospital, where he learned oncology urology as well as robotics. After 2 years of general urology in Nice University Hospital and Cannes Hospital, Dr. Treacy is now doing a robotic fellowship at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in Sydney. Connect with Dr. Treacy on Twitter and LinkedIn.

The most commonly encountered difficulties in academic writing, in Dr. Treacy’s view, are three significant challenges that arise from both his professional lives and human nature. “The first challenge pertains to time management,” says Dr. Treacy, “Given that many of my co-authors are clinicians, it becomes exceedingly difficult to strike a balance between consultation time, surgeries, personal commitments, and dedicated research time. Unfortunately, the latter often takes a backseat, causing projects to exceed their expected durations”. The second challenge revolves around project completion. He thinks that initiating a new project is usually effortless and even exhilarating, involving tasks like literature reviews and study design. However, as time passes, maintaining the same level of enthusiasm to finalize the publication becomes arduous. Therefore, he holds that it is crucial to expedite project completion once the study results have been interpreted. Lastly, he points out that the dearth of technical skills, such as statistical analysis, can intimidate young academicians who feel as if they are faced with a daunting mountain at the onset of a new project.

Speaking of what the authors should bear in mind during preparation of a paper, Dr. Treacy thinks it is crucial to recognize that research requires both energy and time in the first place. He continues, “Therefore, it is essential to maintain patience and consistency throughout the research process, as it is easy to become overwhelmed by our professional and personal responsibilities. Establishing a reasonable and attainable timeline can assist in overcoming the tendency to procrastinate, but it is important not to feel guilty if the timeline is not met, as this can diminish our motivation for conducting research.” Additionally, working collaboratively as a team is vital, in his opinion, as it alleviates the workload for the first or last author and fosters a smoother and more efficient process for everyone involved. Last but not least, he finds it important to embrace the possibility of failure during this journey, as, despite the considerable effort invested in a publication, the results may sometimes prove insignificant or lacking impact. In this regard, research serves as a humbling experience.

From Dr. Treacy’s perspective, it is crucial for researchers to obtain institutional review board (IRB) approval for several reasons. First, it shows a commitment to ethics principles as well as protection of human subjects involved in research. There needs to be an organized study design and informed consent needs to be top priority during research. Furthermore, IRB approval enhances the credibility and reliability of research findings. By adhering to rigorous ethical standards and oversight, the research gains validity and trustworthiness, strengthening its impact and acceptance within the scientific community. Additionally, omitting the IRB approval process can have legal ramifications and damage the reputation of the researchers and the institution involved. By prioritizing IRB approval, researchers uphold ethical standards, protect participants, and establish a foundation of integrity for their research. Ultimately, this ensures the validity and credibility of the findings while promoting trust and confidence in the scientific community.

In the end, Dr. Treacy would like to share his thoughts with all academic writers who have been dedicating themselves to advancing scientific progress, “I take great pride in being chosen as one of the outstanding authors, particularly because I consider myself a newcomer in the field with much to learn from those around me. When I first embarked on my research journey, I was fortunate to receive mentorship from passionate and dedicated individuals, both in France and in the US, which significantly eased the path for me. Throughout this journey, I have also had the privilege of meeting remarkable individuals and exceptional researchers who have provided invaluable assistance in my publications, and whom I now consider friends. Engaging in research offers a distinct sense of fulfillment that cannot be obtained through clinical work alone, as it allows us to contribute to the advancement of science and medicine, leaving behind a trail of opportunities and new projects.”

(by Inga Chung, Brad Li)

Katharina Beyer

Katharina Beyer is a postdoctoral researcher at Erasmus MC under the active guidance of Prof. Monique J, Roobol, specializing in translational research in prostate cancer and kidney cancer. She is currently involved in the Optima big data-project and the PRAISE-U, focusing on early detection of prostate cancer. Previously, Katharina worked on the IMI project PIONEER for the Translational Urology and Oncology Team at King’s College London, developing standardized outcomes and factors for prostate cancer and answering different research questions with a focus on Patient Reported Outcomes. Her PhD centered on patient treatment choices in kidney cancer. She holds a BSc in European Public Health and a MSc in Public Policy and Human Development from the United Nations University Institute for Economic and Social Research on Innovation and Technology, in collaboration with Maastricht University. Connect with Katharina on LinkedIn or Twitter.

In Katharina’s opinion, academic writing is the key to knowledge transfer. As she puts it, “The act of writing up and publishing work allows us as researchers to grasp our accomplishments and, in turn, build upon them to advance our own investigations.” Furthermore, she supplements that it fosters a sense of accountability in research, as the peer-review process aids in identifying potential gaps in research. This scrutiny not only assists the original researcher in refining their work but also empowers others to contribute to the collective pool of knowledge. By engaging in academic writing, one actively participates in the growth and evolution of the field while ensuring the dissemination of valuable insights and findings.

Speaking of the motive for academic writing, Katharina says, “To be honest, the academic writing component is my least favourite aspect of a project. I find the initial research phase much more enjoyable and it motivates me to delve into new ideas and explore various methodologies used within and beyond my field. This process truly engages me. However, I acknowledge the significance of manuscript writing as it facilitates knowledge transfer and the sharing of insights.”

Reporting checklists are often followed when constructing an academic paper. For Katharina, she strongly believes in the significance of using a reporting guideline, as it plays a pivotal role in upholding a high standard of quality. By adhering to a reporting guideline, researchers can ensure that their work is transparent, comprehensive, and meets the established criteria for rigorous reporting.

In the end, Katharina says that academic writing is invariably a collaborative endeavour in her experience. With each manuscript, there is an opportunity to learn from the expertise of others in presenting evidence in a manner that surpasses her own capabilities. And she holds great admiration for her colleagues who possess exceptional writing skills, adeptly delivering information in a concise manner without compromising essential details. “This collaborative dynamic allows for continuous growth and refinement, developing my understanding of effective communication in academic writing,” she adds.

(By Inga Chung, Brad Li)

Taekmin Kwon & Sungwoo Hong

Dr. Taekmin Kwon graduated from University of Ulsan College of Medicine in Korea in 2005. In 2010, he completed training at Department of Urology at Asan Medical Center, and obtained a certificate of Urology. By 2015, he had completed a fellowship in urinary oncology and gained a PhD with a dissertation on prostate cancer. Since then, he has been working as an associate professor at the Ulsan University Hospital and conducting a lot of research and treatment related to urologic oncology as well as urinary disorders, such as stones and robotic surgery. Click here for more information and research of Dr. Kwon.

Dr. Sungwoo Hong graduated from University of Ulsan College of Medicine in Korea in 2005. He completed training at Department of Urology at Asan Medical Center, and obtained the certificate of Urology in 2011. Dr. Hong did a lot of research on andrology and obtained his PhD. Currently, he is working as the representative director of Dr. Jomulju Urology Clinic and is active as an influencer through appearances and lectures on many broadcasts. He is also running a YouTube channel called “Doctor Jomulju”. Learn more about Dr. Hong here.

Seeing the importance of academic writing, Dr. Kwon and Dr. Hong stress that there is power in writing. Knowledge only one has makes no further development. If one writes down what he knows, he can convey the knowledge to others due to this, and it becomes the cornerstone for gaining new knowledge. They add, “Humanity has evolved this way. Never stop academic writing. Share one’s knowledge with others. That's the easiest and best way to contribute what one has to humanity.”

Dr. Kwon and Dr. Hong think that communication and discussion with colleagues is very important for critical writing. Dr. Kwon explains, “Take the study of the penis as an example: while sharing many thoughts with Dr. Hong, I was able to share various opinions about the nose and penis. Also, thanks to his specialty of penile surgery, he was able to collect data and derive results in a short time. Some might wonder why that's important. However, Dr. Hong and I thought otherwise, and we were able to conduct research, and found that many people were curious.”

In Dr. Kwon’s opinion, it is important to allow ethics-based research. All researchers must keep in mind the interests of the subjects and protect research participants. For this, an institutional review board (IRB) approval process is required. This is important because omitting this process can seriously damage the right to participants, and may cause side effects that cause more harm than good.

“Unfortunately, medical writing - isn't that a duty?” Speaking of how to allocate time to write papers under busy schedules, Dr. Kwon and Dr. Hong put it this way, “As we said earlier, knowledge that only mastered by oneself is not very useful or cannot be developed. It could also be wrong. We believe that by writing and sharing, knowledge can be developed and validated. Therefore, we should write even when we are busy.”

(By Inga Chung, Brad Li)

Masato Uetani

Dr. Masato Uetani graduated from Yokohama City University in 2014 and subsequently completed his residency at Odawara City Hospital from 2014 to 2016. Following that, he specialized in urology at Tokyo Yamato Hospital from 2016 to 2018 and Chiba Nishi General Hospital from 2018 to 2019. From 2019 to 2022, Dr. Uetani worked as a resident at the National Cancer Center Hospital. Currently, he holds the position of Assistant Professor in the Department of Urology at Toho University. His primary focus of research and medical treatment revolves around male infertility and sexual function.

Talking about how to avoid biases during academic writing, Dr. Uetani thinks it is essential to have someone else critically evaluate the writing. Additionally, being open to reading papers that present contrasting arguments helps in maintaining objectivity and reducing biases. And in his opinion, authors should always be mindful of the main message they want to convey in their paper and ensure its validity. Engaging in critical self-examination and continuously questioning oneself is crucial for producing a well-written paper.

Dr. Uetani, on the other hand, highlights that it is crucial for authors to share their research data, which he believes is essential for the advancement of science as a whole. By adopting a broader perspective, focusing on the development of humanity, and promoting better research practices, data sharing has the potential to accelerate the pace of scientific progress.

In Dr. Uetani’s view, the most common difficulties for physicians who also work as clinicians lie in maintaining motivation and finding time for research and paper writing amidst outpatient care, surgery, and personal commitments. “It can be challenging to strike a balance and complete the papers that have been started,” says Dr. Uetani, “It is important to clarify the reasons behind conducting research and writing papers, as well as to have clear objectives.”

(by Inga Chung, Brad Li)

Judith C. Hagedorn

Dr. Judith C. Hagedorn is an Associate Professor in the Department of Urology. In addition to general urology, she is an expert in reconstructive and trauma urology. Dr. Hagedorn earned her bachelor’s degree from Rice University, then she went on to complete a master’s degree at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and received her medical degree from Stanford School of Medicine. She remained at Stanford for her urology residency training. She first came to the UW for a fellowship in genitourinary reconstructive surgery under the mentorship of Dr. Hunter Wessells. Dr. Hagedorn’s clinical expertise and interest include male genitourinary reconstruction, management of urologic injury, male urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction. Connect with Dr. Hagedorn on Twitter.

Dr. Hagedorn highlights that a good academic paper should aim to answer a question that has not been investigated before, namely it needs to be novel. It has to have a sound methodology and has to be reproducible. The writing needs to be clear, succinct and easy to follow and have thorough explanations for the findings.

Talking about the qualities an author should possess, Dr. Hagedorn believes that author has to be knowledgeable and informed about the latest research in the field of study and has to have a desire to push the field forward. Critical thinking and knowing what questions to ask is also important. The author is responsible for the research team together with its integrity and needs to assure that the quality of the research is high.

From Dr. Hagedorn’s perspective, the institutional review board (IRB) is extremely important to supervise the safe conduct of a research. It is a mechanism that is in place to protect the rights and manage the risk to human participants. Without the IRB process, participants could be exposed to hazardous interventions that could have detrimental effects on their wellbeing and health. If the participants suffer harm without any mechanism like an IRB in place, the public would rapidly lose trust in the scientific process and community.

Lastly, Dr. Hagedorn would like to share some words of encouragement with those who have been dedicating themselves in advancing scientific progress, “Continue your mission to understand more and expand on prior knowledge. You are working on an important piece of the puzzle. Our field would be stagnant without your work. With your research endeavours, you not only provide new data for our specialty, but also give others who participate in your research great opportunities which may include job offers, scholarships, educational advancement and collaboration.”

(By Inga Chung, Brad Li)

Alexander T. Rozanski

Dr.Alexander T. Rozanski is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Urology at UT Health San Antonio, USA. He completed his urologic residency training at UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, Texas and subsequently completed his fellowship training in complex genitourinary reconstructive surgery at Lahey Hospital and Medical Center in Burlington, Massachusetts. Dr. Rozanski specializes in male genitourinary reconstruction and men’s health. His clinical interests include urethral stricture disease, male urinary incontinence, erectile dysfunction, Peyronie’s disease, and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Connect with Dr. Rozanski on Twitter.

As a clinician and surgeon, Dr. Rozanski prefers manuscripts that have practical and immediate applications to clinical practice. As he puts it, “Ideally, after reading a clinical manuscript in urology, I can walk away with one or several new tools that I can apply in my clinic or my operating room that same day.” He also prefers manuscripts that are efficient and to the point, rather than a verbose style. He explains, “Don’t use 3 sentences to make a point that you can easily make in 1 sentence. Learning how to be thorough yet also concise is an important skill for authors to learn.”

Importantly, Dr. Rozanski points out that whenever humans are involved as research subjects, it is vital to ensure the safety of these participants and that the principles of beneficence and justice have been incorporated into the study. If this process is omitted, ethical and safety issues can arise.

Speaking of the biases that may possibly arise in a medical paper, Dr. Rozanski thinks it is natural to develop biases in medicine, consciously or subconsciously. To mitigate the effect they have on a manuscript, it is important to present the data accurately and honestly. In the discussion section, authors should avoid making conclusions on the data to fit a certain narrative. An example of this would be: avoid using phrases like “This is trending toward statistical significance”. It should be either statistically significant or not. He adds, “Also, never hesitate to have other colleagues, whom you trust, review the data and see if they come to the same conclusions as you do. They may have a helpful and different perspective that can strengthen the paper.”

Lastly, Dr. Rozanski would like to give a few important tips that he has learned over the years: Most academic clinicians are clinicians first and researchers next. Clinical practice usually takes the priority and research is only fitted in when one can. Some may have dedicated research time, but many do not. Unfortunately, this can lead to delays in finishing manuscripts or accumulating a lot of unfinished projects. He explains, “In this type of practice setup, rather than trying to do research in big chunks (e.g., I am going to write the entire first draft of the manuscript this weekend), try to do a little bit each day – 20 or 30 minutes. The task becomes less daunting, and you will almost certainly be more efficient. Also, set deadlines for yourself (e.g., I will finish the literature review by this date, I will finish the data collection by this date, etc.) and hold yourself and your team accountable. Clear communication with team members on expectations and deadlines is also crucial.”

(by Inga Chung, Brad Li)

Muhammed A. M. Hammad

Muhammed A Moukhtar Hammad, MBBCh is currently a research fellow at the department of Urology, University of California, Irvine, California, USA. He obtained his medical degree from Mansoura Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura, Egypt and received his early training at King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center (KFSHRC), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. As a graduate student, he was recently accepted by the Graduate Council at University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine as a candidate for the degree of Master of Science in Biomedical and Translational Science. His most recent projects include: Comparison of the gut microbiome composition between men with Peyronie’s disease and a matched cohort: a pilot study; Comparison of the gut microbiome composition between men with erectile dysfunction and a matched cohort: A pilot study; and Delayed placement of an inflatable penile prosthesis is associated with a high complication rate in men with a history of ischemic priapism. Connect with Dr. Hammad on Twitter.

According to Dr. Hammad, there are two major difficulties commonly encountered in academic writing. 1) Writing Clarity: Achieving clarity in academic writing is crucial, especially in medical fields where precision is essential. Researchers may struggle to convey their ideas clearly and concisely, making it difficult for readers to understand the findings or conclusions. 2) Balancing Technicality and Accessibility: Writing for medical and scientific audiences often involves discussing complex topics. Striking a balance between technicality for experts and accessibility for non-specialists can be challenging, as the content must cater to a diverse readership. To overcome these difficulties, he suggests medical scholars engage in extensive research, seek guidance from mentors or experienced researchers, and participate in writing workshops to refine their academic writing skills. Additionally, collaboration with medical writers or editors can help improve the clarity and precision of the written work. Following guidelines for formal academic writing and maintaining a strong focus on accurate and evidence-based information are essential in producing high-quality academic papers in the medical field.

To ensure one’s writing is critical to the scientific audience, Dr. Hammad highlights that researchers should focus on clear communication, audience understanding, and engaging storytelling. Here are some tips that he shares on how to achieve this:

• Know your audience: Understand the knowledge level of your scientific audience and tailor your writing accordingly. Use appropriate language and avoid jargon that might be unfamiliar to non-experts. This will ensure that your message is easily comprehensible to your target audience.
• Provide a clear overview: Begin your scientific writing with a short overview or elevator pitch that summarizes your research and its significance. This introduction helps the audience grasp the main points before delving into more complex details.
• Focus on clarity: Use simple and precise language to convey your ideas. Avoid overly technical jargon or convoluted sentences that might confuse the reader. Aim for unequivocal accuracy in your scientific writing.
• State the main finding clearly: Clearly state your main finding in the title of your scientific writing. This approach immediately informs the audience about the focus of your work and helps them understand the purpose of your research.
• Practice precision: Be precise and accurate in your scientific writing. Avoid ambiguous statements and back up your claims with solid evidence and data. Precision is crucial for conveying scientific information reliably.

Dr. Hammad goes on to share with us an interesting story about academic writing. Before his team submitted the manuscript titled “Long-term assessment of the safety and effectivity of the Mini-jupette sling: 5-year follow-up of the original series” to TAU, its abstract was presented in the AUA, where it became a topic of discussion during a preceding experts’ workshop/course in Chicago, USA. During this engaging discussion, high-volume prosthetic urology experts expressed their growing reliance on the Mini-jupette option and how its outcomes were reassuring. “As a young researcher, witnessing clinicians immediately embracing the novel surgical option we were investigating was a truly gratifying moment. Their positive feedback and enthusiasm even fueled our team's motivation to delve deeper and report on the long-term follow-up of the original series. This experience served as a significant milestone in my research journey and highlighted the real-world impact of our work and dedication to improve patient care,” he adds.

In addition, Dr. Hammad lays emphasis on the importance for authors to disclose Conflict of Interest (COI) in scientific publications. He believes COI disclosure is an essential component of ethical research practices, and it ensures transparency and credibility in the execution, reporting, and publication of research findings. Disclosing COI is especially important in biomedical research, where research outcomes can directly impact clinical decision-making and individuals' life and health. Disclosure of COI helps reviewers, readers, and the scientific community assess the potential bias and impact on the research findings. Peer reviewers, journal editors, and readers can better evaluate the research's objectivity and potential limitations when COIs are transparently reported. However, it is important to note that the mere existence of a COI is not unethical per se, but failing to disclose it can raise ethical concerns and harm the trust in the research enterprise. In conclusion, Dr. Hammad believes that disclosing COI in scientific publications is essential for upholding the principles of research integrity and ensuring the credibility and trustworthiness of research findings. It allows reviewers and readers to make informed judgments about potential biases and impacts on the research outcomes. By adhering to COI disclosure practices, researchers can maintain the integrity of the scientific process and contribute to the advancement of knowledge with greater transparency and accountability.

(By Brad Li, Inga Chung)

Lindsay A. Hampson

Dr. Lindsay A. Hampson is a reconstructive urologist who completed her residency training at UCSF and a fellowship in Genitourinary Reconstruction & Trauma at the University of Washington in Seattle. She now practices at UCSF and the San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center. She is the Co-Director of the UCSF Lifetime Congenital Urology Program (LCUP), serves as the Associate Chair for Education, the Interim Program Director for the UCSF Urology Residency program, and Associate Fellowship Director for the UCSF GURS Fellowship. Dr. Hampson's research interests integrate her background in ethics, health policy, and urologic trauma and reconstruction in order to conduct health services research related to improving quality of care and patient decision-making, management of stress urinary incontinence in older adults, understanding and improving clinical and quality of life outcomes of patients with urologic congenitalism, and education- and equity-related research. Her research has been supported by external funding from the NIDDK, NIA, and the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation. Connect with Dr. Hampson on Twitter @lindsayahampson and visit her homepage here.

A good academic paper, according to Dr. Hampson, has a well-organized structure that logically follows from one part to the next. Its introduction is crucial for setting up the reader to understand the context and importance of the research project, and the discussion is a critical chance to contextualize results, compare to other existing literature, and consider other questions that need to be asked.

To stay up to date with new insights in an ever-evolving field, Dr. Hampson suggests learning about research through attending meetings, serving as a journal reviewer in order to learn about upcoming research, and making sure to stay apprised of new research as it is published. She adds, “Doing a good literature search is essential anytime you are starting a new paper, because it is a chance to see what is new and what might have come out recently that you might not have been aware of.”

Seeing the prevalence of data sharing, Dr. Hampson points out that the sharing of data offers an opportunity to allow others to make use of pre-existing data and amplifies the gift that the medical community receives from research participants. Therefore, she encourages researchers to share their research data.

“I love the ability to share data and insights with others through academic writing. There is such a joy in knowing that you are advancing knowledge not just for yourself or your individual patients, but more broadly. It’s fun to be a part of the ongoing discussion and conversation, interacting with others in the space that helps to push things forward, and coming up with new ideas and insights as a result,” says Dr. Hampson.

(By Brad Li, Inga Chung)

Juan Chipollini

Dr. Juan Chipollini, MD, FACS is a urologic oncologist and associate professor in the Department of Urology at the University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA. He specializes in the management of urologic malignancies using both complex open and minimally-invasive surgery. His research interests involve biomarkers for bladder and prostate cancer, and he also studies heath disparities in the treatment of urologic cancer patients. Dr. Chipollini has active surgical practices and is the principal investigator in several clinical trials at the University of Arizona Cancer Center. Connect with Dr. Chipollini on Twitter.

For medicine to continue to progress, it is imperative, in Dr. Chipollini’s view, to thrive for more evidence-based answers to various conditions and patient scenarios. This can only be accomplished through rigorous academic writing and a meticulous peer-review process. Without high-quality academic writing, medicine would be a stagnant field without much discovery, in turn negatively affecting patient outcomes.

According to Dr. Chipollini, one of the most difficult things that every young investigator encounters is how to process complex clinical or translational results into concise and succinct arguments. One sign for lack of clarity is when a manuscript becomes difficult to read and often times confusing to the reader. He believes most readers of scientific journals are extremely busy clinicians or scientists, so a clear and easy-to-read article is always preferred.

Biases are nearly unavoidable in academic writing. Nonetheless, Dr. Chipollini deems that if one remains objective to the results presented, it will help avoid generalizations, which often are a source of hidden biases. Academic writers should also examine potential bias within their own cited sources and references.

As an author, Dr. Chipollini emphasizes that it is extremely important to always disclose Conflict of Interest (COI). To him, COI can compromise the integrity of any proposed research, so it is critical to disclose any potential source of bias for the transparency of scientific literature.

(By Brad Li, Inga Chung)

Sonia Pérez-Bertólez

Dr. Sonia Pérez-Bertólez, MD, PhD, FEBPS is currently a Pediatric Urologist and Pediatric Surgeon at Hospital Sant Joan de Déu (SJD), Teknon and Head of Pediatric Urology at Hospital Universitari Dexeus in Barcelona (Spain). She has established as one of her priorities the application and development of minimally invasive techniques to allow greater patient comfort and earlier recovery. She has given many lectures and courses related to her specialty and is the author of many articles in national and international journals. She also has a great interest in teaching, research and is a member of multiple scientific societies.

Dr. Pérez-Bertólez is in charge of the mentoring program for pediatric surgery residents at SJD. She is the Director of the Advanced Surgical Simulation program, the Coordinator of Pediatric Surgical Emergencies at SJD, Professor of the Certified Paediatric Urology Training Programme within the UEMS at SJD, Assistant Professor at University of Seville, University of Barcelona and Tech University, and Honorary Professor at the University of Malaga. Connect with Dr. Pérez-Bertólez on LinkedIn, Twitter, and Instagram.

Academic writing, according to Dr. Pérez-Bertólez, is a way for scientists to communicate their research to others, using precise and technical language that reflects the rigor of scientific inquiry. To her, writing is an integral part of science at every stage – it is how researchers outline a project idea, communicate with collaborators, draft a grant application, synthesize their insights into a manuscript, and share science beyond academia.

Speaking of the key skills of a scientific author, Dr. Pérez-Bertólez points out that one needs to write with precision, structure, clarity and citation, as well as conduct original and rigorous research, to produce a high-quality paper that informs and engages the scientific community. Also, the authors must have relevant scientific knowledge, research skills, logical thinking, organization and communication skills. Other than that, one’s writing must have correct grammar and punctuation. Content must be clear, engaging and effective to enhance reading fluency for the audience. Most of all, the content must be useful - to stimulate new research or to apply to one’s practice to better treat patients.

As an author, Dr. Pérez-Bertólez advocates the use of reporting guidelines (e.g., PRISMA and TREND) during preparation of manuscripts. Reporting guidelines are evidence-based tools that specify minimum criteria for authors to report their research methods and results. They can help authors avoid errors or omissions in their reports, ensure accurate reporting, critical appraisal and validity of research findings, and increase the scientific merit of their papers. Reporting guidelines also help editors, peer reviewers and readers to understand what the authors did and how, and to evaluate the quality and reliability of the research. Therefore, she believes following reporting guidelines can benefit both authors and the scientific community.

“Research provides the foundations of our scientific knowledge; and the challenge of the future is to transfer that knowledge to expand the capabilities of daily practice. By promoting both clinical and basic research, it is made possible to translate new discoveries into clinical practice, evaluate current clinical practices and be able to know what should and should not be done in medicine,” says Dr. Pérez-Bertólez.

(by Brad Li, Inga Chung)

Yozo Mitsui

Yozo Mitsui, MD, PhD, currently serves as a senior lecturer at the Department of Urology, Toho University Faculty of Medicine, Japan. His field of professional and research area includes urological surgery (laparoscopic and robotic), kidney transplantation, urogenital cancer bladder, prostate, adrenal, and kidney), and male genital disease. Recently, he has been examining ways to strengthen the treatment of cancer immunotherapy focusing on the extracellular matrix, elucidating factors that predict treatment efficacy for advanced prostate cancer, and exploring factors related to the occurrence and severity of Peyronie's disease.

TAU: What do you regard as a good academic paper?

Dr. Mitsui: Broadly speaking, I think there are two types of academic papers. One is to make and report discoveries that no one has thought of before. The other is to actually verify and confirm what everyone intuitively feels is obvious (for example, is smoking really bad for your health?). We believe that both types of academic papers can have a great impact on us as long as we keep the following points in mind. 1) Original hypothesis; 2) appropriate techniques and methods to prove the hypothesis; 3) experiments with strict adherence to rules (ethical considerations, etc.); 4) proper interpretation of the obtained results; and 5) deep considerations to support interpretation of results.

Someone's paper may inspire other researchers interested in the field to do further research. In other words, I believe that all academic papers are excellent, regardless of their type or the size of their discoveries, as long as they are created according to a proper flow and rules.

TAU: Science advances rapidly day by day. How do you ensure your writing is up-to-date and can give new insights to the field of research?

Dr. Mitsui: In order to write a paper, we must seek out and absorb a variety of new ideas and knowledge. Fortunately, through PubMed and SNS, we can always obtain the latest information from papers and other researchers. In short, I believe that continuing to write papers is the only way to update one's writing and provide new insights into the field of research.

TAU: What is fascinating about academic writing?

Dr. Mitsui: I am a clinician who examines and treats a variety of patients every day. Treatment is performed based on a variety of evidence, but treatment effects often vary from patient to patient. For example, even when the same drug is used for the same cancer, the therapeutic effect often differs depending on the patient, leading to clinical questions such as “Why do the therapeutic effects differ?” Questions like these have led me to consider clinical data and conduct basic research to support them, which I have published in papers. Some of that data are also being applied to actual patient treatment. In this way, by investigating and researching questions encountered in clinical practice, there is a possibility that the results can be applied to actual clinical practice. I believe that one of the appeals of academic writing is that it allows me to deepen my knowledge as a clinician and create possibilities for myself to provide optimal treatment to patients.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

Rachel A. Mann

Rachel Mann is a genitourinary reconstructive surgery (GURS) fellow at Lahey Hospital and Medical Center in Burlington, Massachusetts. She has clinical interests in urethral stricture disease, prosthetics, genitourinary plastic surgery, and robotic upper tract reconstruction with a dedicated research focus on postoperative outcomes. She currently serves as the chair of the American Urologic Association’s Residents and Fellows Committee. After completion of her fellowship, she accepted a position as assistant professor of urology at the University of Minnesota. Connect with Dr. Mann on Twitter/X @You_the_Mann.

In Dr. Mann’s opinion, academic writing is the key to scientific advancement. Published research serves as the catalyst for guideline updates, FDA approval of drugs, and policy change. Without meaningful research, medicine would not be able to evolve, and therapies would not improve.

To keep herself up to date with the current knowledge, Dr. Mann makes a concerted effort to read the scientific literature on a regular basis and ensure the work she is publishing is in line with the current findings. She tries to investigate questions that have not yet been asked and ensures her methodology is of the highest quality to produce the most accurate results.

“I am motivated to do academic writing by an intrinsic desire to contribute to the growing body of scientific literature and to advance the field of urology. It does require a considerable amount of time and effort, but the feeling of seeing your name on a new article will never get old,” says Dr. Mann.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

Alexandre Rouen

Dr. Alexandre Rouen, MD, PhD, obtained his medical degree in 2007. Since then, he specialized in Medical Genetics with a focus on cytogenetics and reproductive medicine. In the genetics clinic at Trousseau hospital and Maternité des Bluets, he has been seeing patients with infertility related to genetic causes for about 12 years. He later specialized in Sleep Medicine and found ways to combine this specialty with that of Medical Genetics. His team does this by studying, both clinically and in the lab: 1) rare sleep disorders, such as narcolepsy or idiopathic hypersomnia, and 2) the sleep consequences of genetic disorders, such as Klinefelter's syndrome, sickle cell anemia, Down's syndrome, Prader-Willi syndrome, etc. Currently, for his clinical activities, he is affiliated to 1) The Sleep Medicine department, Reference Center for Rare Hypersomnias, at Hôtel-Dieu, Paris, France; and 2) The Reproductive Medicine department, at Maternité des Bluets, Paris, France. And for his research activities: 1) VIFASOM research unit, Université Paris Cité, France; and 2) INSERM U993 research unit, Université Paris Sorbonne, France.

TAU: What role does academic writing play in science?

Dr. Rouen: In many ways, academic writing is science. Science without academic writing would be terribly inefficient, and very early in History did scientists write about their discoveries. Knowledge dissemination, especially in these days and age, has allowed for the stupefying scientific progress humanity has achieved over the past decades. This is especially true in Genetics, where many colossal projects, like the sequencing of the genome completed in the early 2000s, were achieved by a myriad of different laboratories.

TAU: How to ensure one’s writing is critical?

Dr. Rouen: When conducting research, it is very easy to fall into scientific and cognitive biases. In my personal experience, I've tried to be particularly wary of Pygmalion's bias, a self-fulfilling prophecy in which a scientist believes so much in their (positive) results that this ends up affecting the outcome of their experiments. Indeed, obtaining positive results, especially those with direct clinical applications for your patients, can be quite exhilarating, and there's an absolute need for extensive reproduction of the experiments with independent personnel/laboratories/samples.

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

Dr. Rouen: Sleep medicine is a very new field. A PubMed search for the word "sleep" shows 1,311 publications in 1980 and 24,514 in 2022. Since it's so new, there are a lot of discoveries to be made - especially if you intersect it with another relatively new field like medical genetics. Genetic disorders are usually multivisceral. It is, therefore, quite logical that they affect sleep as well. This is, however, a neglected aspect for both clinicians and researchers. We believe that there's a lot to be done at the intersection between sleep, genetics, and reproductive medicine.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

Fumihiko Urabe

Dr. Fumihiko Urabe is currently the Clinical Associate at the Department of Urology, The Jikei University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan. He graduated from The Jikei University School of Medicine in 2012 and completed his urological residency at the same institution. In 2016, he joined Prof. Takahiro Ochiya's laboratory at the National Cancer Center Research Institution (NCC) in Tokyo, Japan, and earned his Ph.D. in 2020. Additionally, he continues to conduct basic research with Dr. Yusuke Yamamoto, Ph.D., at NCC. Dr. Urabe's research is focused on microRNA, liquid biopsy, extracellular vesicles, and single-cell analysis in urological cancers. To date, he has received numerous awards and recognitions for his research from the American Urological Association (AUA), the Japanese Cancer Association (JCA), and the Japanese Urological Association (JUA), among others. He has published over 80 scientific papers in peer-reviewed journals and has presented his research at national and international conferences. Learn more about Dr. Urabe from his homepage and Google Scholar‬‬‬‬‬, and connect with him on X.

Dr. Urabe thinks academic writing is very important, so medical professionals have an obligation to conduct clinical trials and disseminate their research through medical journals. It is essential to first understand that the field of medicine and healthcare advances primarily through research publications. For instance, even if the incidence of fatalities is low, healthcare providers have a duty to inform a wider audience if severe and rare side effects occur. This obligation can be fulfilled by publishing papers and making the information accessible to healthcare professionals worldwide. Failing to disclose such information means that only those directly involved would be aware of such rare and potentially devastating situations. Contributing to the ability of global medical institutions to handle even the worst-case scenarios that occur infrequently is of paramount importance.

In Dr. Urabe’s view, authors writing medical papers should possess several essential qualities. Firstly, an in-depth expertise in the field of medicine is indispensable. A comprehensive understanding of the topic is necessary. Additionally, research skills, including literature review and data collection, are crucial. Proficiency in data analysis is also required. The ability to statistically evaluate collected data and interpret results appropriately is essential. Logical thinking is crucial in paper writing, ensuring a clear argument and leading to sound conclusions. Understanding scientific methodology is indispensable, encompassing appropriate research design and adherence to ethical guidelines. Communication skills are necessary, encompassing the ability to write clear and effective prose and presentation skills. Time management is important for setting schedules and meeting deadlines. Furthermore, resilience to peer review and a willingness to accept criticism is necessary. Collaboration skills are essential for working with co-authors and other experts. Lastly, ethical integrity is required. Adherence to ethical norms and ensuring data accuracy are indispensable in medical paper writing. Only when these qualities are present can one produce valuable and credible medical papers.

Being asked how to avoid biases in one’s writing, Dr. Urabe replies, “To begin with, to avoid selection bias during data collection, authors should carefully choose appropriate samples and conduct random data collection. Furthermore, it's essential to collect information and conduct literature reviews objectively and comprehensively. To mitigate statistical bias, authors should select appropriate statistical methods for data analysis and accurately interpret the results. Transparency in statistical hypothesis testing is also essential. In order to reduce cognitive bias, it is imperative to base the analysis and conclusions on the data, avoiding being bound by preconceived beliefs or hypotheses. Maintaining objectivity and being cautious of personal beliefs and organizational pressures is critical. Lastly, to avoid publication bias, it's important to publish the whole results of the research, including negative findings and contrary evidence. This enhances the reliability and scientific value of medical papers.”

Although academic writing takes a lot of time and effort, Dr. Urabe has diverse motivations for writing medical research papers. Firstly, it stems from the desire to make scientific contributions. Publishing papers can spread new medical knowledge and treatment methods, thereby contributing to the advancement of healthcare. Additionally, the potential impact on patients is a significant factor. Through papers, valuable information can be shared, which may enhance the health and quality of life for many, influencing disease prevention and treatment. Academic recognition is also vital, as publishing papers enhances a researcher's reputation and fosters professional growth. Sharing knowledge and networking are equally appealing, facilitating collaboration with other experts and inspiring new research endeavors. Furthermore, the opportunity for funding, career development, and personal fulfillment plays a role in motivating paper writing. Medical research papers serve as a valuable means to contribute to progress in the field of medicine and to achieve personal satisfaction.

(by Alisa Lu, Brad Li)

Daniel A. Wollin

Dr. Daniel Wollin is a fellowship-trained endourologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Assistant Professor of Urologic Surgery at Harvard Medical School. He completed his undergraduate degree at Williams College, medical degree at the University of Chicago, urologic residency at New York University, and a fellowship in nephrolithiasis treatment and robotic surgery at Duke University. He earned a Master of Science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Integrated Design and Management with a focus on human-device interaction and medical device design after completing the training. Today, Dr. Wollin’s research focuses on novel devices and treatments for urologic conditions, as well as neuroergonomic assessments and endoscopic surgical techniques. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

In Dr. Wollin’s view, academic writing is very important. While some people consider that academic writing and academic literature are the final product, he believes that the process of taking our research out into the world can generate new ideas. While answering scientific questions, we are able to advance science by inspiring readers to ask questions of their own.

Dr. Wollin believes that thinking critically about one’s own writing is a key skill for an author. When reading the article, it is as if we have never thought about this topic. Read as if we were professional critics, picking out every little loophole we can. By trying to answer questions before they are asked, a good writer can hopefully reach as many people as possible.

Academic writing takes a lot of time and effort. What motivates Dr. Wollin to do so? He says, “When we come up with novel ideas and start answering questions that have been burning in my head for a while, getting those ideas down on paper (or electronic pages) is all the motivation I need! It's incredibly rewarding to see an idea reach a point where your peers see your work as beneficial to the urologic world at large. It’s also a great opportunity to bring the next generation of academicians, scientists and urologists into important published literature.”

“During my academic career, I’ve seen and read some important and interesting science in TAU. It’s an honor to have our work published here,” says Dr. Wollin.

(by Alisa Lu, Brad Li)

Venkat M. Ramakrishnan

Dr. Venkat Ramakrishnan is a clinical fellow in pediatric urology at the Boston Children’s Hospital and a visiting scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He completed his undergraduate, graduate, and medical training at the University of Louisville as part of its combined BS-MD and MD-PhD programs. Recently, he completed his residency in the Harvard Program in Urology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. He started as a Fulbright Scholar, studying urologic physiology and biomedical engineering, which helped him gain a wealth of research experience. Today, he remains devoted to developing a drug delivery platform for advanced bladder disease states and works closely with Dr. Rosalyn Adam and Prof. Michael Cima. Dr. Ramakrishnan’s research aligns with his clinical interests in pediatric oncology and complex urologic reconstruction. Connect with him on X.

Dr. Ramakrishnan thinks frequent discourse is critical for making progress and pushing the boundaries. Academic writing trains us to clearly convey the findings stemming from significant ideas. Additionally, academic writing encompasses various forms, including original basic and clinical research, book chapters, reviews, commentaries, and case reports. In many instances, sharing our thoughts and findings often stimulates new, exciting ideas for investigation.

Speaking of the key skill sets of an author, Dr. Ramakrishnan says, “An author must distill complex ideas into understandable terms, construct a logical case for exploration, and systematically present relevant findings. In essence, papers should be concise and focused. Exceptional authors also possess the ability to narrate a story compellingly, aided by the current emphasis on elegant study design thanks to emerging technologies. The late Donald Coffey, a titan in urology, often emphasized, ‘Do not be fooled by the authority of the printed page.’ I wholeheartedly embrace this notion. Authors should not rigidly adhere to established beliefs or the prestige around a particular observation. Instead, they should maintain an open mind, recognizing that very few things are ever definitively proven and that multiple viewpoints can coexist when supported by sufficient evidence. Fortunately, these are all skills and mindsets that can be nurtured over time, and I continue to work on honing each of them.”

Academic writing consumes a lot of time and effort. In Dr. Ramakrishnan’s view, writing is rarely easy, and getting started is almost always a step that limits speed. Knowing that writing will make him think about new ways to analyze or solve problems is a key motivator in itself. He finds a lot of clarity during the long and arduous writing process and writes down any lingering questions – these are often fodder for follow-up research (or future papers).

Finally, in Dr. Ramakrishnan’s opinion, Translational Andrology and Urology (TAU) is easily accessible, has a wide readership, and covers a variety of timely and interesting topics. Therefore, he chose to publish on TAU.

(by Alisa Lu, Brad Li)

Ryan P. Smith

Dr. Ryan P. Smith is an Associate Professor of Urology at the University of Virginia with a clinical and research focus in Male Reproductive Medicine and Surgery. He attended medical school at the University of Virginia School of Medicine and completed his Urology residency at the University of Virginia. He subsequently completed a fellowship in Male Reproductive Medicine and Surgery at Baylor College of Medicine with Dr. Larry Lipshultz. Dr. Smith joined the faculty at the University of Virginia in 2013, where he serves as the Co-Director of the Andrology Fellowship, the Urology Residency Program Director, and the Medical Student Clerkship Director. He was previously selected by the American Society of Reproductive Medicine as a CREST Scholar and was a traveling scholar for the Society for the Study of Male Reproduction as well as the Society for Male Reproduction and Urology. Dr. Smith's clinical practice is split between an academic setting at UVA Health and Virginia Fertility & IVF, a private IVF clinic, giving him a broad perspective on fertility care. His research focus pertains to the clinical evaluation of male infertility and sperm-egg interaction. His collaborative research with Dr. Jeff Lysiak, Ph.D., on the role of phosphatidylserine in sperm-egg fusion, was published in Nature Communications and is currently being developed as a new diagnostic test for fertilization-competent sperm. He was previously nominated for the AUA Early Career Research Showcase in 2020 for his male infertility research. He has been an invited speaker at the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the American Urological Association and has published extensively within the field of male reproductive medicine. His passion is serving others in their fertility journey and advancing the field of male reproductive medicine and surgery. Click here to learn more about Dr. Smith.

To write a good academic paper, Dr. Smith thinks one should consider the main aims of the study at the outset and compose a thesis or hypothesis statement. It is generally advisable to start with an outline prior to drafting the manuscript. Authors should have a sound understanding of the current, relevant scientific literature. It is helpful to have a working knowledge of statistics. The manuscript should be well organized and structured appropriately for the journal. The conclusion should be well supported by the results.

When preparing a paper, Dr. Smith believes that authors should do a thorough review of the existing literature. As with any academic writing, a research manuscript begins with a strong hypothesis statement. He encourages the trainees to create an outline before composing their initial draft. It is important to understand our current knowledge gaps and how our research can help fill them.

When writing, the most commonly encountered difficulty for Dr. Smith is the scarcity of patient data. His subspecialty focusses on male infertility. Many of their research is based on retrospective series with limited numbers of patients. They have to continue to strive to be innovative in their research and collaborate as a field to produce high-quality research.

Academic writing takes a lot of time and effort. However, Dr. Smith enjoys projects that involve collaboration with colleagues and wants to help push the field of male infertility research forward. The ultimate reward is seeing research positively impact patients in their hopes of building a family.

(by Alisa Lu, Brad Li)

Katie S. Murray

Katie Murray is currently an Associate Professor in the Department of Urology at NYU Langone Health and Grossman School of Medicine. She also serves as the Chief of Urology Service at the NYC HHC Bellevue Hospital. She received her undergraduate degree from Westminster College, followed by Medical School at A.T. Still University. She completed her residency in Urology at the University of Kansas, followed by a Society of Urological Oncology fellowship at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York City in 2016. She then served on the faculty at the University of Missouri from 2016 to 2022. While at the University of Missouri, she completed a Master of Science degree in Academic Medicine. She has published over 80 peer-reviewed journal articles as well as book chapters. She has given presentations in the area of urological oncology at various regional, national, and international meetings. She currently serves as a Deputy Editor for the Journal of Urology and editorial reviewer for many journals in urology and medical education. She is on the genitourinary committee of the Alliance clinical trials cooperative group. She also serves in leadership roles for the Young Urologic Oncology clinical trials symposium of the SUO. She is board-certified by the American Board of Urology. She remains an active member of organized urology and urological oncology with clinical and research interests in urothelial cell carcinoma and the impact of interventions and treatments on patients’ functional lives. Connect with Dr. Murray on X.

According to Dr. Murray, getting started is the most challenging thing in academic writing. She says, “You feel excited about your research result, then you have to sit down and put that feeling onto paper, but it is usually hard to portray the details and big picture you want to the reader.”

When writing, Dr. Murray believes that authors should be simple and direct in expressing their ideas, results, and outcomes while remaining open and honest.

The burden of being a scientist/doctor is heavy. Dr. Murray thinks the time for writing papers has to be blocked off so that she can be truly dedicated to writing. “If I knew I had a deadline, I would put my clinical work on hold and try to stay away from the hospital or office in order to finish the paper before the deadline. However, when you work in the clinical areas, it is very hard not to get caught up in the clinical work, caring for patients and reviewing cases and so on,” she says.

Finally, Dr. Murray would like to say a few words to encourage other academic writers who have been devoting themselves to advancing scientific progress, “Keep going. Everything counts. And you don’t need to change the world or opinions in a single paper.”

(by Alisa Lu, Brad Li)

Parth Udayan Thakker

Parth Thakker, MD, is a current chief resident in Urology at Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, NC, USA. He will be transitioning to Indiana University to pursue a Society of Urologic Oncology fellowship. His clinical interests include upper tract urothelial carcinoma, urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder, and renal cell carcinoma, and his research interests are in clinical outcome measures and post-operative pain management to reduce the effects of medical provider based narcotic scripts on the opioid epidemic. Connect with Dr. Thakker on Twitter @ThakkerP_UroMD.

A good academic paper, according to Dr. Thakker, should be based on a well-thought-out specific question followed by sound scientific statistical analysis, astute interpretation of the results, and high-quality writing. Scientific work can be excellent, but poor writing and grammar can make the work difficult to understand and decrease its impact. Likewise, a poorly designed project that provides few answers often causes confusion, and may even lead to misinterpretation by the reader.

In Dr. Thakker’s view, authors writing scientific papers should first and foremost be sincere and honest. Many medical and surgical decisions in today’s milieu are made on scientific evidence and insincere work, which may misdirect our decision-making. Second, authors should be attentive to detail and be aware of prior works to build upon to contribute to the literature. Finally, authors should be able to communicate their work well to prevent misinterpretation and misunderstandings by readers.

“I chose to publish in Translational Andrology and Urology as the journal takes pride in quality work and is a great place to submit review articles, primary research manuscripts, ‘how I do it’ articles and case reports making it a one-stop shop for quality work. The ease of use of the website makes reading the articles accessible to readers/authors and makes the dissemination of information simple,” says Dr. Thakker.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

William Harrison

Dr. William Harrison is currently a full-time urology Principal House Officer at The Toowoomba Base Hospital in Queensland, Australia. His research interests include robotic-assisted minimally invasive surgery, rural and regional healthcare delivery, and surgical education. His recent projects have focused on quality improvement initiatives to optimise patient care and length of stay. While working full time, Dr Harrison is completing a Master of Surgical Education at The University of Melbourne, working on a qualitative minor thesis project gauging the current experience and perception of robotic surgery in Australian urology trainees. Click here to learn more about Dr. Harrison and connect with him on LinkedIn.

In Dr. Harrison’s opinion, academic writing is the cornerstone of advancing scientific knowledge. By publishing research studies and reviews in peer-reviewed journals, academic surgeons formally document their methods, findings, and interpretations to be scrutinised by their field. This process incentivises rigorous methodology and analysis, while also enabling future researchers to build on prior work. Academic writing promotes transparency, credibility, and the gradual accumulation of evidence. Publications indicate productivity and impact, helping secure funding and opportunities for individuals and institutions. Scientific progress relies on critical discourse and debate in academic literature to challenge established ideas with new paradigms. Overall, academic writing plays a pivotal role in questioning, sharing, evaluating, archiving, and ultimately expanding scientific understanding.

Dr. Harrison believes there are several essential qualities that efficient academic authors should possess. First, the authors require expertise in their niche area to contextualise research and discern meaningful contributions. Second, creativity aids in developing theories and framing impactful scientific questions. Third, persistence through peer review and rejection sustains motivation. Fourth, strong written communication skills make complex concepts accessible. Fifth, attention to detail prevents errors while organising citations, methods, data, and references. Sixth, understanding ethical scientific conduct, like conflicts of interest and plagiarism, preserves integrity. Seventh, patience navigates the lengthy publishing process. Eighth, objectivity considers constructive criticism via peer review. Ninth, passion for expanding human knowledge drives progress through challenges. Tenth, an analytical mindset critically examines one’s own work to improve. Eleventh, collegiality establishes collaborative networks to support initiatives. Twelfth, leadership guides projects contributing to team science. Ultimately, these qualities allow an author to proficiently conduct and disseminate rigorous, ethical research.

As for Dr. Harrison, these personal and collaborative strategies can facilitate effective critical analysis in academic writing. Fostering an open yet sceptical mindset prevents confirmation bias when examining own scientific work. Thoroughly investigating limitations alongside strengths provides a balanced self-assessment. Comparing and contrasting findings in relation to existing literature helps identify novelty, discrepancies, incremental gains, or paradigm shifts. Establishing an interdisciplinary peer-review team with a diversity of expertise spotlights alternative perspectives and blind spots. Double-blind peer review prior to journal submission adds impartiality. Partnering with experienced mentors aids constructive feedback on early drafts. Undertaking systematic review or meta-analysis condenses extensive information into unified insights. Conveying both affirmative and uncertain conclusions prevents overstatement. Ultimately, maintaining personal accountability, seeking input from varied sources, and communicating shades of grey enable critical evaluation vital for academic integrity.

The burden of being a doctor is heavy. Finding time for academic writing alongside clinical service delivery is tremendously difficult, but Dr. Harrison thinks the scholarly pursuit remains vitally important for career progression and widespread scientific impact. Though realistically, doctors may only have 30 minutes of discretionary time each day for academic efforts, he has found some strategies to help maximise productivity within these tight time constraints: Set a regular daily timeslot devoted exclusively to writing with no distractions or interruptions. Use commute time for proofreading papers. Foster accountability through monthly goals shared with colleagues and mentors. Have all devices, notes, and references synched, and ready for focused bursts at the computer which allows for a seamless transition between work, home, and office. Reward progress to maintain motivation. Develop sustainable routines not reliant on inspiration alone. Make use of scribbles on scraps of paper throughout busy days to seed future articles. Dictate draft paragraphs into voice memos when hands are occupied with clinical tasks. Collaboration provides both camaraderie and shared responsibility through the writing process. Ultimately, perseverance, adaptation, accountability, and teamwork enable scientific publication amidst competing demands on physicians.

(by Alisa Lu, Brad Li)

Antony Pellegrino

Dr. Antony Pellegrino is a resident in Urology at San Raffaele in Milan. Currently, he is undertaking a Clinical Fellowship at l'Hôpital de la Pitié Salpêtrière in Paris. He is passionate and curious about research in the field of Urology, as it covers a wide breadth of different topics, allowing him to really space from 'bench to bedside'. In particular, his interests have been captivated by the field of minimally invasive surgery and robotics. Most notably, this brought him to undertake a research fellowship, which he recently finished at the University of Illinois in Chicago with Dr. Crivellaro, whose group is at the forefront of robotic surgery, particularly the novel da Vinci Single Port. Connect with Dr. Pellegrino on LinkedIn and X.

Dr. Pellegrino believes that academic writing is very important because it is the bedrock of scholarly communication, allowing researchers to share their discoveries and insights with the global scientific community. Academic writing also plays a pivotal role in disseminating knowledge and, importantly, fostering collaboration and building upon existing research. It is essential to do this through official channels as it ensures the integrity and credibility of scientific endeavors, contributing to collective advancement.

In Dr. Pellegrino’s opinion, avoiding biases in academic writing is crucial for maintaining objectivity and credibility. It should not be limited only to the physical action of writing; it should be a mentality. One must conscientiously examine personal beliefs, cultural influences, and preconceptions. That said, study biases are often inevitable, so one should critically evaluate the evidence and acknowledge them. It does not mean that one should not voice their opinions on the topic, even within the publication itself, as he feels that is the ultimate objective of publishing!

Science advances rapidly day by day. Ensuring the writing is up-to-date and giving new insights into the field of research is the issue that Dr. Pellegrino struggles the most with. Staying abreast of the latest developments is paramount in producing impactful academic writing and delivering the best patient care. Unfortunately, it takes time and hard work. Regularly engaging with current literature, attending conferences, and participating in discussions help to understand emerging trends. Certainly, curiosity is key. Continuous self-education and collaboration with colleagues facilitate the integration of the most recent findings into one's work. Also, making the most out of technology and social media can help in this life-long endeavor. Knowing the landscape and asking the right questions are the best ways in which one can produce current and impactful research.

Having just started this long journey of research, Dr. Pellegrino is always amazed by the rigor and determination his colleagues’ display. He commends their dedication to advancing the medical field. He would like to encourage the younger colleagues who often, like himself, feel overwhelmed and feel they are not contributing significantly, “Embrace the challenges, relish the journey of exploration, and remember that every contribution, big or small, adds to the mosaic of medical understanding and improving patient care. Keep writing, keep questioning and inspiring—our shared pursuit of knowledge is both a privilege and a responsibility.”

(by Alisa Lu, Brad Li)

Lisa J. Kroon

Dr. Lisa J. Kroon obtained her medical degree from Leiden University in the Netherlands. Following her clinical experiences in the urology departments of various Dutch hospitals, she started pursuing a PhD at the Urology and Pathology departments of the Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Under supervision of Prof. Dr. Geert J. L. H. van Leenders and Prof. Monique J. Roobol, she is dedicated to prostate cancer research. Her PhD is centered on pathological prostate cancer growth patterns and ways to implement these into clinical decision making. Other areas of interest are intra-operative frozen sections during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, as well as the follow-up of these operated patients regarding complications, but also biochemical recurrence, metastatic potential and prostate cancer specific death. Connect with Dr. Kroon on LinkedIn.

TAU: From your point of view, what authors have to bear in mind during preparation of a paper?

Dr. Kroon: During preparation of a manuscript, authors should bear in mind that the process of writing a successful paper starts long before the writing itself. It begins by formulating a research question, obtaining ethical approval and consent, and collecting high-quality patient data in a systematic manner. The trend of centralization of care not only enhances clinical practices but also presents valuable research opportunities. It may be a great moment to start thinking about your next research project.

TAU: How to ensure one’s writing is critical?

Dr. Kroon: Keep in mind the clinical value of your research. What is already known, and what are the questions that need to be answered? Results have little value if the study is incorrectly designed. The research method and statistical analysis are the bridge between the knowledge gap and study results. Authors should be aware of limitations of their study design and report on them. The most interesting part comes next: despite the limitations, can we translate the findings into clinical practice?

TAU: Do you think it is important to follow reporting guidelines during preparation of manuscripts?

Dr. Kroon: Reporting guidelines such as STROBE and PRISMA ensure high-quality data reporting and aid readers in reflecting on the strengths and weaknesses of studies. Adhering to these guidelines aids authors in increasing the likelihood of successfully publishing in a journal, getting their observational studies incorporated into systematic reviews and making actual valuable impact on patients’ health care. Therefore, I believe that, rather than viewing these guidelines as obstacles, authors can exploit them to enhance the quality of their work.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Sopark Manasnayakorn

Dr. Manasnayakorn originates from Bangkok, Thailand, where he was born and currently resides. Having earned his undergraduate degree from Chulalongkorn University, Thailand, he further pursued his academic journey by obtaining the MSc and PhD degrees from Imperial College London, UK. Presently, he serves as an associate professor at the Department of Surgery within the Faculty of Medicine at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, Thailand. His professional focus centers on breast cancer surgery and endoscopic procedures. Notably, he is actively involved in a recent project that involves developing a contactless volumeter for the measurement of arm volume and circumference.

Dr. Manasnayakorn thinks academic writing serves as a channel for disseminating scientific knowledge, particularly to fellow researchers and practitioners in the medical field. This dissemination contributes to the evolution of medical practices, preventing redundant efforts and promoting the accumulation of knowledge. Furthermore, he points out that academic writing is a valuable tool for enhancing critical thinking skills, an essential aspect of success in the academic realm. Additionally, it functions as a meticulous record-keeping mechanism, ensuring the preservation of knowledge for future reference.From his perspective, academic writing holds paramount importance for researchers. “It not only facilitates effective communication of research findings but also provides an avenue for researchers to enhance their communication skills,” explains he.

Science advances rapidly day by day. A crucial aspect of maintaining the relevance of one’s own research lies in the literature review process, according to Dr. Manasnayakorn. The process of literature review ensures that the research questions being posed remain current. He mentions that keeping pace with the latest trends is facilitated through networking with fellow researchers. Engaging in academic communities, such as attending conferences and seminars regularly, is another effective means of staying up-to-date. He also shares that collaborative efforts with researchers in one’s own field open new horizons and contribute to the awareness of evolving research landscapes.

Speaking of the impact of Conflicts of Interest (COI) on research, Dr. Manasnayakorn explains that it can vary from subtle, unconscious bias to the outright manipulation of data and results. He thinks the extent of influence depends on both the researcher's character and the nature of the COI. Hence, transparent disclosure of COI is of paramount importance. “This disclosure ensures that the research has been conducted without any form of bias, particularly financial bias,” says he.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Sehwan Kim

Dr. Sehwan Kim is a Professor of Biomedical Engineering, Vice Director of the Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation, Director of Biotech Business Incubator and IoBT Laboratory at the Dankook University in South Korea, with a joint appointment as a Specialist in the Beckman Laser Institute at University of California, USA. His research interests are in IoBT (Internet of Biophotonic Things) devices and platforms for wireless sensing, efficient energy harvesting and low power design for the applications of biophotonics, medical devices, civil and environmental engineering. He received his Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (EECS) from the University of California in 2011, under Prof. Pai Chou. He had also worked as a post doctorate scholar at CECS, UC Irvine, USA. Before joining the academia, he had gained eight years of industry experience including working at Samsung Electronics Telecommunication Network R&D Center as a Senior Engineer for mobile phones. He joined Dankook University as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Biomedical Engineering in September 2013. He is a member of several Technical Program Committees of DAC and ASP-DAC, and has received the Low Power Design Contest Award at ISLPED 2013, Dankook University Chancellor's Best Teaching Award 2016, Beomeun Academic Award 2021, and Korea Health Industry Development Institute’s Award 2022. Learn more about Dr. Kim here and connect with him on LinkedIn.

Academic writing often involves evidence synthesis. Dr. Kim thinks regardless of one being a junior or a seasoned researcher, one must start by conducting a literature search to understand the landscape. Starting specifically on information concerning the project, the novelties and the unanswered questions, avenues for further exploration would become clearer and more obvious. “Research is rarely revolutionary; it is often built upon previously established works,” says Dr. Kim. Researchers should start by collecting evidence to support their points of view. He keeps on sharing tips for doing so, “Depending on the complexity of the question or the hypothesis, this can start as in silico. However, as the feasibility of the experiment becomes more apparent, one can move towards ex vivo and in vivo. These are the steps to consider when gathering evidence. It is also important to remember that the purpose of presenting evidence is to convince the readers that something is possible and to inspire them to explore this area as well.”

Data sharing is prevalent in scientific writing in recent years. Dr. Kim fully supports the idea of open access, but he believes that the concept has not been utilized to its fullest potential. He thinks when researchers share their data, another way to view it is an open invitation for collaboration. “When two groups are working on the same data set, it would seem probable that they have some overlapping goals. However, I think that these opportunities are often missed and open access could potentially do much more to advance collaborative and interdisciplinary research,” expresses he.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Omar Safar

Dr. Omar Safar, MBBS, is currently a resident at the Urology Department, in Armed Forces Hospital (Southern Region, Khamis Mushait), Saudi Arabia. After obtaining his medical degree from King Khalid University in Abha, Saudi Arabia, he completed a research fellowship at Jacob Medical Center and Moore’s Cancer Center at the University of California, USA. Driven by a desire to become an exceptional urologist, he is pursuing his residency in Saudi Arabia, where he believes the access to cutting-edge technology would provide him an unparalleled learning experience. Beyond mastering the latest techniques, he aspires to contribute to advancing Saudi healthcare by spearheading clinical trials and bringing evidence-based best practices to the forefront. Connect with Dr. Safar on LinkedIn and X (Twitter).

Being an academic writer, Dr. Safar considers an author's toolkit is vast and varied, with definitely more than just pens and paper. A great author has the qualities which make him go beyond technical skill and delve into a unique blend of personality, passion, and dedication. He believes an author should possess curiosity, imagination, empathy, emotional Intelligence, perseverance, discipline, communication, storytelling, openness to learning and feedback, and acceptance of criticism.

Speaking in a more solid way, Dr. Safar points out that selecting the appropriate evidence for synthesis and analysis in academic writing is crucial for building a strong and convincing argument. The key is to be selective, critical, and thorough in the approach to evidence selection. This will ensure the academic writing is grounded in solid research and contributes meaningfully to the field. Moreover, he emphasizes it is important to align with one’s research question and focus on the scope of one’s work. Additionally, he advises authors not to rely solely on one type of evidence; but to include a mix of quantitative and qualitative data, primary and secondary sources, and studies from different theoretical perspectives. It is also useful to bear in mind that authors should not just summarize the findings of the chosen evidence but to prioritize recent research findings that reflect the field's current state of knowledge. From his experience, looking for evidence with high citation counts or published in prestigious journals often indicates significant contributions to the field.

Regarding the application of Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, Dr. Safar thinks it is crucial for research involving human subjects for several reasons: protecting human subjects, giving scientific validity, ensuring legal compliance, and facilitating public trust. There can be consequences of ignoring IRB approval for researchers, he thinks, which include the loss of funding, facing publication bans and even legal repercussions, and thus damaging one’s reputation. Without the IRB approval, it also comes with increasing risk of harms to the participants in terms of psychological or emotional distress. Participants’ loss of trust in research and even negative experiences can erode public trust in research and discourage future participation in valuable studies.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Laura Zuluaga

Dr. Laura Zuluaga, M.D, M.S.c., is working in urology research, focusing on urologic oncology and kidney cancer at the Department of Urology, Mount Sinai University, US, with Dr. Ketan Badani. She has worked for six years in clinical research in urology, recently bridging the gap between basic and clinical research in kidney cancer. She is currently working on projects with innovative diagnostic methods, such as high-definition micro-ultrasound, to differentiate histological subtypes of kidney cancer. She is also engaged in research using artificial intelligence in the setting of robotic surgery (surgical intelligence) and the novel use of histotripsy for minimally invasive management of small renal masses. Recently, she has been collaborating with genomic experts within Mount Sinai to investigate repeat-expansion mutations in renal cell carcinoma. Their focus is on understanding the implications of these mutations on DNA regulatory sequences that could be therapeutic targets in the future. Connect with Dr. Zuluaga on LinkedIn and X (Twitter).

To Dr. Zuluaga, a good academic paper should prioritize relevance. In a system that often encourages quantity over quality in research to fulfill numerical or academic quotas, she thinks it is crucial for a paper to bring forth new contributions to the topic. She elaborates that clarity is another essential criterion as she thinks knowledge holds value only when it is easily comprehensible. She adds, “Having that in mind, I try to avoid including irrelevant or tangential information to the topic, complicated tables for the reader, or information in the text that is not useful to understand the idea conveyed. Finally, a good academic paper must maintain honesty, acknowledging and addressing limitations alongside presenting results. This approach aids the scientific community in understanding how the information can be applied in a clinical setting.”

Science advances rapidly day by day. In order to ensure the writing is up-to-date and can give new insights to the field of research, Dr. Zuluaga thinks there is no other way round instead of reading. In the world of research, staying in the loop depends on reading a lot. When one writes and edits, one ends up reading tons of articles to keep up with the important ideas. Therefore, if one wants to stay informed, one can try doing some research as this makes one reads a large number of articles per topic. She also points out the importance of going to conferences and meetings as that helps one understand what is happening worldwide. Such occasions also provide an opportunity for researchers to communicate, and see what is relevant in different places and how they are making progress in the fields.

Speaking of the motivation to keep her continue as an academic writer, Dr. Zuluaga expresses that she has always believed that truth is liberating, and engaging in research is a path to uncovering truths. Her passion lies in delving into intricate details that delineate, for example, on why a specific surgical approach proves more effective for certain patients or exploring ways to revolutionize disease diagnosis – aspects often perceived as static and resistant to change. The freedom to be creative within this field, to advocate for ideas, study them, and witness their potential to bring about positive changes in the medical practices and benefit patients is something that she finds deeply fulfilling. “Conducting research involves pursuing a small piece of the puzzle, meticulously connecting each piece of information gathered to develop a comprehensive perspective. Ultimately, this holistic understanding contributes to enhancing the quality of clinical practice,” says she.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Gregory P. Murphy

Dr. Gregory Murphy is from the New England area originally. He has attained his BA degree in Biology at Tufts University, USA, and received his medical degree from the University of Massachusetts, USA. He got his residency training in the field of urology at the University of Connecticut and completed a fellowship in Trauma and Reconstruction at University of California, also in the US. He is currently an Associate Professor at Washington University where he is the GURS Fellowship Director and also the Clerkship Director for medical students. His research focuses on reconstructive urology.

To Dr. Murphy, a paper is more elegant and impactful when there is a simplicity and clarity to the scientific question, method and writing style. He emphasizes the importance of the peer-review process as that ensures the independent and appropriate critique of a scientific paper. He thinks it is also important for authors to consider their own study’s weaknesses and other possible interpretations of the data. This can help limit biases in the writing process.

Speaking of reporting guidelines such as STROBE or PRISMA, Dr. Murphy agrees they can significantly improve the quality of research and when appropriate, they are helpful in standardizing the research process. “A manuscript that follows these guidelines can be more easily trusted,” says he.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Nicholas M. Donin

Dr. Donin is an Assistant Professor of Urology at the David Geffen School of Medicine at University of California, USA, and a practicing Urologist and Urologic Oncologist. His clinical focus is the treatment of urologic cancers, including cancers of the prostate, bladder, kidney, and testis, as well as surgical treatments of benign prostatic hypertrophy. He has received advanced training in robotic-assisted surgery as well as anatomic enucleation of the prostate. His research focuses on clinical questions influencing patient care in urologic oncology. Connect with Dr. Donin on X (Twitter).

TAU: What do you regard as a good academic paper? What are the essential elements of a good academic paper?

Dr. Donin: For a paper to be impactful to me, it has to tell a story that advances either the science or the clinical medicine. As a clinician, for me that usually means answering a question that supports or changes my clinical practice, but in the pre-clinical space, a good academic paper advances a more fundamental understanding of a biological system. Regarding the essential elements of a paper, it all starts with a clear question that has clinical relevance, and is of interest to practicing clinicians. There should be a hypothesis or hypotheses clearly started in the introduction. This is followed by a clear and understandable explanation of the research plan and methods. Results should be presented in as straightforward a manner as possible, and try to highlight the most important findings whilst avoiding inclusion of the unnecessary. The discussion should try to re-engage the findings with the original research question, and within the discussion, a story should emerge about how the results change medicine in the broader sense. The readers should now understand why the results have changed the way we view the world and our patients.

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

Dr. Donin: An author should understand what their discussion will be about prior to even beginning the research project. One has to be able to ask why the results of the investigation will be impactful, and how, prior to embarking on the project to begin with. Next, the results of the project need to be laid out in clear and stark terms. I would advise authors complete their tables and figures prior to even beginning the writing process. The methods can be completed next, and I would advise that the introduction essentially be written last. By the time one is writing the introduction to the story, the entire story should be self-evident from the results and discussion. Finally, regarding data sharing in scientific writing, I do believe it is critical for authors to share their data to allow for confirmation of the findings and to allow further exploration.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Gilad Karavani

Dr. Gilad Karavani obtained his MD from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel, and he completed a 6-year residency in obstetrics and gynaecology at Hadassah Medical Center, Israel. He has published over 65 original articles and received numerous awards and research grants for his extensive work on oocyte markers during in-vitro fertilization, exploring the maturation and aging of oocytes. His expertise extends to male infertility and fertility preservation in both basic and clinical aspects. After recently completing a fellowship in Male Reproductive Medicine under Dr. Keith Jarvi's guidance at Mount Sinai Hospital, Canada, he now serves as a senior physician in the Infertility and IVF unit at Hadassah Medical Center, contributing to clinical and basic research in the field. This journey exemplifies his commitment to advancing medical knowledge and establishing a dedicated male infertility service at Hadassah Medical Center. Connect with Dr. Karavani on LinkedIn.

Academic writing, to Dr. Karavani, serves as a vital bridge between the "bench" and "bedside." In the field of basic science, the publication of novel findings not only stimulates fellow researchers to delve deeper into their investigations but also has the potential to inspire clinicians to gradually integrate this valuable evidence-based data into clinical practice. He points out that clinical studies play a crucial role in enhancing physicians' skills and standardizing patient care. By incorporating data from recent papers and adhering to current guidelines, he believes clinicians can significantly improve treatment approaches and ultimately enhance patient outcomes.

Science advances rapidly day by day. Dr. Karavani thinks a dedicated researcher must stay consistently informed. The continual influx of new data, particularly in the dynamic field of medicine, presents both a challenge and an opportunity. Consequently, he advocates that modern researchers direct their focus toward a more specific field. Simultaneously, they should engage in collaborative efforts with fellow researchers on both national and international levels within the chosen domain. He keeps on sharing, “Encouraging research meetings and Journal Clubs is pivotal to facilitate the exchange of novel data, fostering discussions about its significance and practical implementation. This collaborative approach ensures that each researcher receives valuable feedback on the quality of emerging data and advancements. It also allows them to stay up-to-date with ongoing research initiatives and recent publications. In this collaborative environment, peers become a source of knowledge enrichment, fertilizing each other's understanding.”

Finally, Dr. Karavani comments on the importance of transparent disclosure of any potential conflict of interest (COI), even if it appears minor to the authors. He thinks it is the responsibility of fellow researchers and reviewers to assess whether the COI is pertinent to the experiment, study, or published data. Given the substantial variation in COI effect among individuals and across disciplines, standardization proves challenging. Hence, he emphasizes that it is imperative that authors disclose all potential COIs, leaving the evaluation and consideration of these disclosures to their peers.

(by Masaki Lo, Brad Li)

Andries Van Huele

Dr. Andries Van Huele is a 6th year urology resident at Ghent University Hospital in Belgium. Throughout his residency, he has maintained a broad interest across the whole spectrum of urology, valuing an in-dept understanding in this extensive and interesting medical specialty. His research interests have been particularly focused on prosthetic urology (sphincter prosthesis and penile implant surgery) under supervision of Prof. Dr. Koenraad Van Renterghem (Jessa Hospital, Hasselt, Belgium) and on prostate cancer. Despite being in the early stages of his career, he tries to contribute not only in clinical practice but also in the field of science. Connect with Dr. Van Huele on LinkedIn.

A good academic article, according to Dr. Van Huele, is one that puts innovation at the forefront. In his opinion, it is important to step beyond the boundaries of popular topics and to explore ideas that are both out-of-the-box and practically applicable in everyday practice. He thinks that the most important aspects of qualitative research are clearly defined objectives, an undisputable methodology, findings based on robust data and a critical discussion. Ethical guidelines are also of utmost importance. He likes to read articles that are not only a contribution to theoretical knowledge but also provide noticeable benefits for daily clinical practice, whether it is through groundbreaking and complex laboratory research or by simple and ready-to-use comparisons.

Dr. Van Huele understands the importance of elaborating evidence synthesis when writing an article. He emphasizes that the selection of appropriate evidence is crucial for building a strong basis for a research. Defining a research question is one of the most important things, as it guides one in selecting the most relevant articles. He thinks that authors should prioritize their sources on relevant, recent, peer-reviewed work. A few qualitative papers should be prioritized compared to a vast number of low-quality studies. To him, including different types of articles, such as randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses, is also interesting. “A critical eye for biases and limitations of your selection of articles is a skill you should learn by extensive reading. This can be time-consuming, but will ultimately result in becoming a better researcher,” says he.

Balancing the work as a resident in training and a researcher is sometimes difficult, according to Dr. Van Huele, because of his schedule filled with clinical duties, training programs, and on-call shifts. In spite of that, he allocates half a day a week for doing scientific research, a practice that he believes should be encouraged among young professionals. Most of his scientific work is being done during his free time, driven by a genuine passion for science and an understanding of its potential to make a difference. However, he also points out that sometimes the best research ideas surface while doing lucrative activities, unrelated to work.

(by Lucille Ye, Brad Li)

Joseph Gabriel

Dr. Joseph Gabriel, BMBS, MSc, FRCS (Urol), is a Specialty Trainee in Urology (ST7) currently finishing his residency in urological surgery at the Royal Surrey County Hospital in Guildford, UK. He has a subspeciality interest in robotic uro-oncology, and is currently training in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) at the highest volume robotic centre for this procedure in the UK (504 RARPs, and ~70 robotic radical cystectomies). He has a keen research interest in uro-technology, robotics and artificial intelligence, and his research has been published in high-calibre urological journals including the British Journal of Urology International (BJUI) and Translational Andrology and Urology. He sits on the Executive Committee for the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) Section of Trainees (BSoT) representing the interests of all urological trainees (residents) nationally. Connect with Dr. Gabrie on X (Twitter) and LinkedIn.

A good academic paper, in Dr. Gabriel’s view, is one that combines robust methodology with a topic that people want to hear about: a new ground-breaking practice-changing innovation, a thought-provoking discussion, a novel way of looking at things. “No one wants to read a paper written for the sake of writing a paper: we have to have something to say!” says he.

Speaking of the way to ensure one’s writing is up-to-date and give new insights to the field of research, Dr. Gabriel emphasizes that it is essential for urologists to keep themselves well-grounded in the world of urological research. To achieve that, he attends conferences; reads journals; and researches novel cases he encounters. In his opinion, the field of artificial intelligence is the latest kid on the block when it comes to innovation. He says, “We’re about to see a real paradigm shift in the way we practice medicine in its wake. Equally, we have to have discernment: we have to be able to separate the wheat from the chaff, to identify what really will impact things, and what won’t.”

Dr. Gabriel considers the power to connect to research peers for patients as the fascinating thing of academic writing. He says, “There’s nothing quite like reading a great paper and feeling that you’ve really benefitted, and then having the opportunity to meet the author of the paper in person and really understand what made them think that way, what led them to innovate, what drove them forward. The excitement of driving a research question forward is something we’ve all experienced and is part of our role as both clinicians and scientists.”

(by Lucille Ye, Brad Li)