In 2023, many HBSN reviewers 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.
August, 2023
Giovanni Battista Levi Sandri, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "Agostino Gemelli" IRCCS, Italy
September, 2023
Ho-Seong Han, Seoul National University, Korea
August, 2023
Giovanni Battista Levi Sandri
Dr. Levi Sandri is a surgical oncologist who currently works at Fondazione Policlinico Universitario "Agostino Gemelli" IRCCS, Rome, Italy. In 2018, he obtained the achievement of National Scientific Ability for Associate Professor of General Surgery and of Full Professor in 2020. He has a broad clinical practice that includes hepatobiliary and pancreatic cancers and liver transplantation. His research interests include minimally invasive surgery, both laparoscopic and robotic. His research often includes national and international multicentre studies, with a particular interest in hepatocarcinoma, analysing its resective aspects up to liver transplantation. Currently, he is exploring the pancreatic part of the research. Connect with Dr. Levi Sandri on Twitter and LinkedIn.
In Dr. Levi Sandri’s opinion, reviewers are crucial to maintaining the credibility of the articles that are being published. Without peer review with an objective opinion on the article, misinterpreted or, even worse, incorrect data could be published. Constructive criticism allows authors to improve a study.
Nevertheless, biases are inevitable in peer review. According to Dr. Levi Sandri, when a scientist reaches certain levels, one way or another, the scientists would all know each other, especially those who go to congresses and those who publish on the same subject, it becomes inevitable to incur bias. It is up to the professionalism of the reviewer to agree to review a paper only if he or she is willing to maintain an objective distance.
“The work of the reviewer remains in the shadows, requiring time and attention that is often taken away from home. Without this, there would be no constructive discussion. Let us always remember that everything we do is for the good of our patients,” says Dr. Levi Sandri.
(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)
September, 2023
Ho-Seong Han
Dr. Ho-Seong Han graduated from Seoul National University College of Medicine in 1984 and finished his internship and residency at the Department of Surgery at Seoul National University Hospital in 1989. He is now a full-time Professor of Surgery at Seoul National University, College of Medicine. His field of interest is hepatobiliary surgery and laparoscopic surgery. He world-first performed laparoscopic right posterior sectionectomy, central bisectionectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma, and laparoscopic right side donor hepatectomy. He has performed more than 2,000 cases of laparoscopic liver resection until 2022. Recent interests include early diagnosis of cancer and cell therapy of MSC. He was/is the President of Korean Society of HBP Surgery (2019-2020), President of Korean Laparoscopic Liver Surgery Study Group (2008-Present), Chairman of Korean Society of Endoscopic Laparoscopic Surgeons (2016-2018), and President (2020-2021) and Chairman (2014-2016) of Korean Society of Surgical Oncology.
Many candidate reviewers decline to review when they receive one. This is a commonly seen problem in the existing peer-review system, according to Dr. Han. On the one hand, he believes that acceptance of review requests should be encouraged. On the other hand, he encourages candidate reviewers to have the mindset that reviewing is an important duty of scientists. Institutions, universities and hospitals would better include peer-reviewing as one of the achievements of the staff, doctors, and professors.
“I am involved in reviewing manuscripts as editor of several surgical journals. Reviewing is one of the important tasks of being an editor. Reviewing is also a scientific contribution as a scholar. If I am available, I will try to accept a review request. However, due to the escalating number of journals, it is hard to accept all invitations. In that case, I would consider the influence of the journal. HBSN is for sure the highest priority to me,” says Dr. Han.
(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)
