In 2025, many APM authors make outstanding contributions to our journal. Their articles published with us have received very well feedback in the field and stimulate a lot of discussions and new insights among the peers.

Hereby, we would like to highlight some of our outstanding authors who have been making immense efforts in their research fields, with a brief interview of their unique perspective and insightful view as authors.

Outstanding Authors (2025)

Luis Posado-Domínguez, The University Hospital of Salamanca, Spain

Meena Kalluri, The University of Alberta, Canada

Abby M. Lohr, The Mayo Clinic, USA

Kazuko Akashi, Fuchu Hospital, Japan

Outstanding Author

Luis Posado-Domínguez

Dr. Luis Posado-Domínguez is currently a Medical Oncology Resident at the University Hospital of Salamanca. His main research focus is metastatic lung cancer and the importance of early palliative care in improving patients' quality of life. He is also actively involved in a project assessing the physical benefits of exercise in patients with active cancer.

As an academic writer, Dr. Posado-Domínguez believes that following the reporting checklist is essential. This tool makes it relatively straightforward to ensure methodological rigor in a research paper. Additionally, reading other authors' work and analyzing their writing styles is valuable for improving one's own academic writing. A deep understanding of the field is also fundamental before drafting a manuscript. Lastly, proper data collection and classification are crucial to minimize bias and enhance the quality of the research.

Dr. Posado-Domínguez thinks one of the essential skills for a scientific author is self-belief. A strong foundation for publishing a good paper is having confidence in one’s work. In medicine, researchers are surrounded by brilliant minds—researchers, educators, and clinicians with exceptional abilities. He believes that developing confidence, reading extensively from other authors, and finding a truly fascinating research question are key factors in conducting meaningful and high-quality research.

“The first time I worked on a research paper, I was very excited when I sent the draft to Dr. Olivares-Hernández—my mentor and now also a friend. I truly believed I had done a great job. However, two days later, he sent it back full of corrections and, very politely, told me that everything needed to be changed. It was a reality check. Life is tough, and research is a reflection of that. It was a hard lesson, but I learned a lot from it,” says Dr. Posado-Domínguez.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Meena Kalluri

Dr. Meena Kalluri is a Professor of Medicine at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. She is the founder and director of the Multidisciplinary Collaborative ILD Clinic at the University of Alberta. She has developed a patient-centered approach with early-integrated palliative care to improve health-related quality of life and death in fibrotic interstitial lung diseases. Allied health team engagement, community participation, and caregiver engagement in palliative care delivery are key features of this model. Her clinic has received the Jon B Meddings Clinical Innovation Award from the Department of Medicine and has been recognized nationally by the Canadian Foundation for Healthcare Improvement as an emerging innovation in palliative and end-of-life care. Her research focuses on developing clinical tools to improve care and service delivery in ILD. She is creating pathways to assess and manage chronic breathlessness throughout the disease trajectory from diagnosis to progression and end-of-life.

Dr. Kalluri thinks a good academic paper makes the reader think more deeply, consider new perspectives, and gain a new understanding of the field they love and practice. Ultimately, its purpose is to alter clinician’s behavior in order to benefit patients. By identifying and appropriately addressing clinical gaps, a good paper provides possible solutions to relevant problems and discusses new directions for further progress. The language used must be easily understood, precise, and concise with acknowledgment of bias.

From Dr. Kalluri’s perspective, authors must possess clarity of thoughts related to their work, the ability to communicate ideas in an easy-to-understand language, and be open and humble to other ideas and suggestions. The latter is essential for successful collaboration with large groups. It also helps when faced with rejections. As an author, she is grateful to the reviewers for their comments, which she uses constructively to make her work better.

“Publishing with APM was a pleasure. The communication and support were excellent. The review process was done well with adequate time to respond to comments and criticism. Unlike most journals, my relationship did not end with publication, they continued to provide me updates on my article such as generated views and digital footprint. I appreciate that very much,” says Dr. Kalluri.

(By Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Abby M. Lohr

Abby Lohr, PhD, MPH, is an Assistant Professor in the Division of Epidemiology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota. She works toward healthy equity by using a community-based participatory approach in collaboration with immigrants and refugees in southeastern Minnesota as part of the Rochester Healthy Community Partnership. Her research seeks to design and implement culturally tailored interventions to prevent and manage chronic illness and promote cancer screening. Connect with her on LinkedIn.

In Dr. Lohr’s view, academic writing is the backbone of scientific progress, ensuring that knowledge is accurately recorded, shared, and built upon. It allows scientists to share their findings with the broader scientific community. This dissemination of knowledge is essential for the advancement of science. Additionally, academic writing provides a permanent record of research methods, data, and conclusions. This documentation is vital for reproducibility and future reference. She keeps writing current by conducting thorough literature searches and setting up email alerts for new papers. She collaborates with immigrants and refugees facing health disparities to ensure their voices are heard in decision-making and scientific research. By including their perspectives, she aims to make science more inclusive and beneficial for all.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Kazuko Akashi

Dr. Kazuko Akashi holds a Master of Science in Nursing and is a Certified Nurse Specialist in Cancer Nursing at an acute care hospital in Osaka, Japan. With a background in hematology and palliative care, her research focuses on decision-making support for cancer patients, particularly those with hematologic malignancies. She is actively involved in interdisciplinary collaboration to enhance patient-centered care, ensuring that treatments align with patients’ values and wishes. Her recent research explores the motivations and expectations of patients undergoing treatment for relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancies, aiming to integrate clinical evidence with individualized care. She has presented at academic conferences and contributed to discussions on advancing oncology nursing practice. Through both clinical practice and research, she strives to bridge the gap between standardized guidelines and personalized care to optimize patient outcomes. She believes that truly understanding patients’ voices is essential.

APM: What role does academic writing play in science?

Dr. Akashi: Academic writing serves as a crucial bridge between clinical practice and scientific advancement. While science relies on rigorous methodology and standardized reporting, the realities of patient care are deeply individual and context-dependent. Through academic writing, we have the opportunity to transform real-world clinical experiences into structured knowledge that informs future research and guidelines. In my field, I have seen firsthand how even a single well-documented case can challenge existing perspectives and contribute to broader discussions. The accumulation of such cases, supported by systematic research, helps refine medical guidelines and improve patient outcomes. This interplay between standardization and real-world complexity is where true progress happens. Academic writing is not just about sharing findings—it is about continuously questioning, learning, and evolving our understanding of care.

APM: Academic writing often involves evidence synthesis. Can you share tips on selecting the appropriate evidence for synthesis and analysis?

Dr. Akashi: When selecting evidence for synthesis, it is important to remember that each study builds upon previous research. Our task is not just to collect data but to thoughtfully consider how earlier findings influence current clinical practices. Evidence encompasses more than mere numbers; it reflects the collective wisdom of those before us, shaping the guidelines we follow today. Clinically, a single study might appear as just one among many. However, in academic writing, even one well-documented study can spark change, influencing future guidelines and decision-making processes. Balancing the understanding that a study is a small part of a larger picture with its potential impact defines our roles as both clinicians and researchers. Therefore, when synthesizing evidence, I focus on both the quality of each study and its practical implications for patient care. This involves considering how findings apply in various clinical settings, identifying existing gaps, and ensuring our knowledge evolves with new insights.

APM: Do you think it is important to follow reporting guidelines (e.g. STROBE, and CONSORT) during the preparation of manuscripts?

Dr. Akashi: Standardized reporting guidelines provide a common framework that allows research to be critically evaluated and compared. However, true expertise in a field comes from integrating these structured approaches with the unique realities of clinical practice. In palliative care and hematology, for example, patient cases rarely fit neatly into predefined categories. While guidelines like CARE for case reports or CONSORT for clinical trials ensure methodological rigor, they should not restrict capturing the complexity of real-world patient experiences. The most meaningful contributions come from research that is both scientifically rigorous and deeply reflective of clinical reality. By adhering to reporting standards while embracing the nuances of clinical individuality, we enhance the credibility of our research and contribute to the depth and specificity of knowledge in our field. This interplay between structure and individualization refines our expertise and ultimately improves patient care.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)