Peer review serves as a cornerstone of scholarly publishing, playing a vital role in maintaining the standards, reliability, and trustworthiness of scientific research. This month, we are proud to recognize the Reviewer of the Month for April 2025—someone whose exceptional commitment and knowledge embody the principles of this essential practice.
Reviewers are instrumental in helping authors enhance their manuscripts by offering detailed evaluations and insightful suggestions. Their efforts contribute to the publication of research that is robust, relevant, and methodologically rigorous.
Every month, the BiomolBiomed Editorial team honors a peer reviewer who has shown remarkable dedication to the peer review process. This acknowledgment is reserved for individuals who consistently provide thoughtful, thorough, and constructive evaluations—helping authors improve their work and advancing the scientific field as a whole. Their efforts reflect the collaborative spirit and pursuit of excellence that drive scientific progress.
This month, we are delighted to announce that the Reviewer of the Month Award is presented to Toby N. Weingarten, M.D. Dr. Weingarten, a Professor of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine at the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Rochester MN, USA, has been recognized for his outstanding review, which provided invaluable insights that greatly enhanced the clarity and rigor of the authors’ research.
We had the opportunity to speak with Dr. Weingarten about his approach to peer review and his views on the ever-changing landscape of academic publishing. During our conversation, he shared his research passions and offered thoughtful perspectives on recent trends and challenges in his field. Below are some key takeaways from our discussion:
Interview:
1. What inspired you to pursue a career in scientific research, and what motivates you to continue in this profession?
As a physician it is part of my professional duty to provide my patients with the best care possible. For me, endless investigation into my clinical practice is integral for me to achieve these aims. I strongly believe that the barriers for all clinicians to audit their practices and outcomes and then adjust their care accordingly are much lower than what is perceived. I encourage all physicians early in their careers to adopt such a curious outlook and find a seasoned mentor to guide them in their inquiries as a way to incorporate this concept into their practices. Their patients will be better for it.
2. What strategies do you use to ensure that your feedback is both fair and useful to the authors?
I recognize it is a tremendous amount of effort for authors to prepare a manuscript for submission. As a reviewer I owe it to the authors to reciprocate their efforts and provide a thoughtful critique of their work. I have been privileged to review work from very seasoned investigators as well as those early in their careers. For early authors who may not have mastered all the nuances of preparing a manuscript it is part of my role to give feedback in order to help them grow as investigators. Even when I recommend “reject”, I hope the authors can read my comments as a way to improve future inquiries. I am very thankful for every review I ever received, even the tough and disappointing ones, as these have guided me throughout my career.
3. What steps can be taken to improve the peer-review process to ensure it better aligns with the needs and expectations of today’s researchers?
Today’s reviewers are receiving an endless number of requests to review papers and unfortunately, I must reject many of these because I am too busy with my own work. I need to be selective and review only those manuscripts which fall into my area of expertise. However, I have also done editorial work, and I appreciate finding good reviewers is a challenge. The current environment leads to a degree of burnout from both reviewers and editors. Faced with this dilemma, I want to provide a challenge for young investigators to improve the quality of manuscripts they submit. There are several steps in doing this. Importantly, find a seasoned mentor who has the capacity to work with you to guide your work from the beginning including study design and approach so the work you do is meaningful and the data you provide is comprehensive. Second, when preparing your work, follow published guidelines on how to organize your manuscript. The ”Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research” (equator network) has great resources to help you. Third, if English is not your first language, find someone to help you with writing. Lastly, I would dissuade authors to rely on AI generated text as the output of these tools is subpar and it inhibits your growth as a developing author.
We are proud to recognize Dr. Toby N. Weingarten for his exceptional contributions, which set a high standard and serve as a source of inspiration for fellow reviewers striving for excellence. His dedication highlights the importance of peer review as a foundational element of the scientific publishing process. We also encourage the wider academic community to continue valuing and supporting this critical aspect of scholarly communication.
📢 THEMATIC ISSUES:
Check out our open Calls for papers for thematic issues. Submit your paper today and join our thriving community and global network of researchers!
- Immune Prediction and Prognostic Biomarkers in Immuno-Oncology
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning in disease diagnosis and treatment target identification
- Insulin for Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Pathophysiology, Complications and Treatment
- Cell-based Therapeutics
And don’t forget to dive into our blog
Editor: Merima Hadžić
Leave a Reply