In 2024, TAU reviewers continue to make outstanding contributions to the peer review process. They demonstrated professional effort and enthusiasm in their reviews and provided comments that genuinely help the authors to enhance their work.
Hereby, we would like to highlight some of our outstanding reviewers, with a brief interview of their thoughts and insights as a reviewer. Allow us to express our heartfelt gratitude for their tremendous effort and valuable contributions to the scientific process.
January, 2024
Alessandro Zucchi, University of Pisa, Italy
February, 2024
Daniel Heidenberg, Mayo Clinic, USA
April, 2024
Matthias May, St. Elisabeth Hospital Straubing, Germany
May, 2024
Hiroshi Fukushima, Tokyo Medical and Dental University Hospital, Japan
January, 2024
Alessandro Zucchi
Dr. Alessandro Zucchi has been the Associate Professor of Urology since 2020 at Department of Translational Research and New Technologies in Medicine and Surgery at University of Pisa, Italy. He is expert in the field of andrological and reconstructive surgery; furthermore, he is interested in basic research about cell culture to use as substitution tissues in reconstructive surgery. He has also good experience in female pelvic floor reconstruction and male/female incontinence. Learn more about him here.
Dr. Zucchi reckons that reviewers must have good experience regarding the topic covered in the papers submitted to them for review. They must also have some rudiments in statistics field.
It is the only realistic possibility to discuss topics in which a reviewer is considered an expert, giving own scientific contribution to the urology community, which motivates Dr. Zucchi to do peer review. Furthermore, he indicates that TAU is an important scientific journal in the urological field so he chooses to review for TAU.
From a reviewer’s perspective, Dr. Zucchi stresses that it is important for authors to disclose Conflict of Interest (COI) because this is the only way for an author to report scientific data in a realistic way and not affected by some type of profit.
(by Lareina Lim, Brad Li)
February, 2024
Daniel Heidenberg
Daniel Heidenberg is an endourology fellow at Mayo Clinic, Arizona, USA. He received his undergraduate and medical degree from Tulane University. He completed his urologic residency at George Washington University. His main research focuses on quality-of-life outcomes related to urolithiasis and BPH, particularly in the setting of endoscopic enucleation. Currently, his main projects and research focus involve prospective research investigating the optimal stent duration after ureteroscopy and reducing incontinence after laser enucleation of the prostate.
Dr. Heidenberg believes that a reviewer should be detail-oriented and up-to-date on the contemporary research. This will enhance a reviewer’s ability to critically evaluate a project’s methodology and purpose. When reviewing a project, it is important to make sure that researchers are using the proper methods and variables to answer the question the manuscript is addressing. A reviewer should be well-versed in many different types of approaches in clinical research both prospective and retrospective.
As for a healthy peer-review system, Dr. Heidenberg thinks that it demands integrity and hard work. It is imperative that reviewers give their best effort to improve manuscripts to reach the highest standard. He points out that the studies quoted to the patients are published after approval from peer review, and we are relying on this system to report accurate data.
To minimize the potential biases during review, Dr. Heidenberg focuses on identifying a clear hypothesis and then correlating that hypothesis with the methods to determine if the proper procedures were followed to evaluate the stated hypothesis. He points out that by focusing on the process, rather than the endpoint, reviewers can limit outside biases.
(by Lareina Lim, Brad Li)
April, 2024
Matthias May
Prof. Matthias May is a professor of urology at St. Elisabeth Hospital Straubing, Bavaria, Germany. Additionally, he holds a teaching position at the Department of Urology, University of Regensburg, Bavaria. His primary professional focus is on operative urologic-oncologic surgery, including robotic-assisted procedures. He maintains a broad scientific interest in urology, particularly in developing prognostic prediction models, including biomarker-based, for various urologic cancers across diverse clinical settings. In recent years, his research has increasingly focused on translational projects involving penile, prostate, and bladder cancer. Prof. May has secured multiple grants for his research endeavors and has initiated/founded more than 30 multicenter studies. He has authored over 250 peer-reviewed articles, serving as the first or senior author on most of them. Presently, his h-index stands at 39, with 5,802 citations to his work (i10-index: 137). Learn more about him here.
Prof. May reckons that peer review is the cornerstone of scientific integrity, serving as a critical checkpoint in the validation and dissemination of research findings. It acts as a quality control mechanism that ensures only robust, methodologically sound, and ethically conducted studies find their way into the scientific literature. He thinks that by subjecting manuscripts to the scrutiny of experts in the field, we can identify potential flaws, provide constructive feedback to improve the quality of the work, and ultimately safeguard the credibility of scientific knowledge. “For a journal like TAU, which prides itself on excellence, peer review ensures that every published paper meets the highest standards, providing clinicians and researchers with reliable information to guide their practice and future investigations,” adds he.
In Prof. May’s opinion, reviewers must approach each manuscript with a sense of fairness, responsibility, and a constructive attitude. First and foremost, it is essential to assess the study's scientific validity by critically evaluating the methodology, statistical analyses, and interpretation of the results. Reviewers should also consider the novelty and relevance of the research within the broader field of urology, particularly in urologic oncology. However, he further points out that it is important to remember that their role is not merely to criticize but to offer feedback that helps authors improve their work. Constructive comments should be clear, specific, and actionable. Additionally, reviewers must maintain confidentiality and declare any conflicts of interest to uphold the integrity of the review process.
“To my fellow reviewers, I extend my deepest gratitude for your unwavering dedication and invaluable contributions to our field. Your meticulous evaluations and thoughtful feedback are the unsung pillars of scientific progress, shaping the quality and integrity of the research that guides our practice and future innovations. While the work is often demanding and time-consuming, the impact of your efforts cannot be overstated. Together, we uphold the standards of excellence that define our community and pave the way for the next generation of breakthroughs in urologic oncology. Let us continue to support each other in this noble endeavor, knowing that our collective expertise and passion are instrumental in advancing patient care and scientific discovery,” says Prof. May.
(by Lareina Lim, Brad Li)
May, 2024
Hiroshi Fukushima
Dr. Hiroshi Fukushima is an Assistant Professor at Tokyo Medical and Dental University Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. He obtained an M.D. at Tokyo Medical and Dental University. Also, he obtained a Ph.D. at Tokyo Medical and Dental University Graduate School and completed a post-doctoral fellowship at the Molecular Imaging Branch, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. Dr. Fukushima’s research interests include the role of frailty and sarcopenia in the management of urologic cancers, the development of biomarkers in urologic cancers, the role of immune checkpoint inhibitors in urologic cancers, and the development of novel anti-cancer therapy against urologic cancers. Now, he focuses on translational research of near-infrared photoimmunotherapy (NIR-PIT), a new anti-cancer therapy that selectively damages the cell membrane of cancer cells based on near-infrared light-induced photochemical reaction of antibody-IRDye700Dx conjugates.
“Objective peer review is to carefully review whether the methodology is appropriate and whether appropriate conclusions are stated from the results,” says Dr. Fukushima. He indicates that he tries to focus on these points in all papers from as critical a perspective as possible to make sure his review is objective.
As a reviewer, Dr. Fukushima believes that it is crucial for authors to disclose any Conflicts of Interest in their papers. The author's personal, financial, or professional interests may potentially change their interpretation or presentation of research findings.
(by Lareina Lim, Brad Li)
