Peer review is an essential part of the scientific publishing process, helping to ensure that research papers meet high standards of quality and accuracy. Each month, the BiomolBiomed Editorial team recognizes a reviewer who has gone above and beyond in providing thoughtful and constructive feedback on the reviewed manuscript.
This month, we’re pleased to announce that the Reviewer of the Month Award goes to Prof. Enver Zerem, MD, PhD, Department of Medical Sciences, The Academy of Sciences and Arts of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Dr. Zerem’s review stood out for its exceptional quality, providing authors with valuable feedback that helped them improve the clarity and rigor of their research.
We sat down with Prof. Zerem to learn more about his approach to peer review and his thoughts on the current state of the publishing industry. Here are a few highlights from our conversation:
Q1: Please tell us more about your research interests.
A1: My research interest is mainly focused on the field of gastroenterology, especially pancreatic diseases, as well as scientometrics. Most of my scientific publications are focused on those scientific areas.
Q2: How do you balance your time between reviewing manuscripts and your own research projects? In your opinion, what are the most important qualities that a good reviewer should possess?
A2: I receive a large number of review requests, but can only accept a limited number of them for review. A good reviewer should have a good knowledge of the topic covered in the scientific article being reviewed, as well as a good knowledge of scientific methodology.
Q3: What are some common mistakes that authors make in their submissions, and how can they be avoided?
A3: In my opinion, the most common mistakes that authors make when writing a scientific article are insufficiently clearly highlighted scientific novelties that the article brings, as well as an overly extensive discussion that is not focused on the relationship between the facts stated in the article and relevant data in the literature related to that topic.
We’re thrilled to honor Prof. Zerem as our Reviewer of the Month, and we’re grateful for his contributions to the scientific community. We hope that his example will inspire other reviewers to aspire for excellence in their work, and that it will encourage everyone to value the peer review process as an essential part of the scientific publishing ecosystem.
Editor: Ermina Vukalic