In 2025, many ASJ 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)

Tan Chen, Geisinger Health in Pennsylvania, USA

Mohammad Al Tarah, Sheikh Jaber Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah Hospital, Kuwait

Adil S. Lakha, University of Oxford, UK

Igor Monsellato, AOUAL SS. Antonio e Biagio e Cesare Arrigo, Italy

Ernest Cheng, Campbelltown Hospitals, Australia

Raffaele De Marco, The University of Turin, Italy

Outstanding Author

Tan Chen

Dr. Tan Chen is a double board-certified and fellowship-trained orthopaedic spine surgeon and assistant professor at Geisinger Health in Pennsylvania, USA, specializing in minimally invasive techniques, outpatient surgery, enhanced recovery, and complex spinal reconstructions. He completed his undergraduate studies in neuroscience with high honors at Dartmouth College and Harvard University, followed by his medical studies at Michigan State University. At the University of Toronto, he completed his residency in orthopaedic surgery and subsequently a combined orthopaedic and neurosurgical fellowship in complex spine and trauma surgery. His research interests include enhanced recovery after surgery, patient outcomes, emerging technologies and techniques, medical education and healthcare economics. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

To Dr. Chen, critical elements of a good academic paper include a clear thesis statement and reason for investigation, well-organized structure and data delivery, and clarity on the clinical significance of the results to the paper’s audience. In constructing a paper, he believes that it is important to see the forest for the trees. To not get bogged down in the details too much, and to focus on the paper’s overall message and significance.

“AME Surgical Journal provides a streamlined platform to distribute and share research on the latest medical advancements and topics, particularly for me in orthopaedic spine surgery, to a wide international audience,” says Dr. Chen.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Mohammad Al Tarah

Mohammad Al Tarah is currently a first year resident in the plastic surgery board program of Kuwait. He started his scientific and medical careers in Norwich England where he received a diploma in foundation science, to which he progressed to the Netherlands. There he graduated from Maastricht University where he earned his MD along with his Bachelors and Masters degrees in medical science. He started his research career focusing on breast surgery with his masters thesis revolving around VECTRA 3D imaging and breast volumetrics. Afterwards, during his time in general surgery as an intern, he encountered a breast necrotizing fasciitis case that sparked his interest and made him keen on publishing this case as it is rare to see such presentation. His current research focus is shifting into craniofacial surgery focusing more on scar healing in post cleft lip repair patients. 

From Dr. Tarah’s perspective, authors require a number of skill sets that help carry them through the research, the writing and finally the publishing processes. 1) Patience and enthusiasm: as the writing process takes time and effort, one needs to have motivation and enthusiasm to do so. 2) Self critique: an author needs to constantly ask themselves questions like “Why am I writing this paper?” and “What will I add to the exisiting literature”. Knowing when to progress with writing is very important, but equally important is knowing when to abort an idea and not to insist on pushing through with it. 3) Leadership: a key skill when dealing with research, as delegating tasks, setting deadlines and managing a team of researchers can help make or brake a research and could aid gratefully in efficiency when writing a paper.

The way Dr. Tarah sees it, in writing, sometimes we slip into biases without even realizing. Writing a paper can be an immersive experience, where the author becomes ultra focused on his/her writing, and in doing so, falling into biases which takes place without the author being fully conscious about it. Avoiding such pitfall can be done by stopping every once in a while and going through the whole paper, asking oneself what his/her findings mean/entail, and asking for other authors involved as well as senior authors or supervisors to give their input and critique on the writing/finding. As our own vision sometimes maybe obscured when making our own writing.

“Academic writing can be very time consuming and tedious, not to mention the lots of effort required. As many may not be full-time researchers, as a result, many find themselves shuffling clinical work and having to make time for academic writing. However, the outcome of writing can be very rewarding and could potentially hold keys to helping many patients that the author may never meet or encounter. This is what motivates me during writing specially in my latest article that has been published in AME. I had to balance multiple factors to be able to complete that paper. My motivation through it all was the possibility of gaining reach and helping patients get an early diagnosis to whom I may never meet but I would still have some part in helping,” says Dr. Tarah.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Adil S. Lakha

Adil Lakha is an academic clinician based at the University of Oxford and Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. His research focus is on hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery, specifically on improving oncological outcomes for patients with pathology affecting the liver, pancreas, and gallbladder. Recent clinical research work includes assessing the role of cell salvage in major liver surgery, enhancing the understanding of oligometastatic gastro-oesophageal cancers, and working on radiomics in liver cancer. He is currently working toward building a career in delivering clinical trials in this subspecialty area, as well as widening his skillset in translational research into cancer immunobiology. Connect with him on ResearchGate and LinkedIn.

In Dr. Lakha’s opinion, important skills in authorship involve excellent written and verbal communication, flexibility when projects go wrong, and creativity in devising new projects to provide fresh perspectives on research challenges. In addition, collaboration is critical in ensuring projects are delivered with a high standard with input from colleagues across clinical and scientific disciplines. Authorship also involves transparency with the reporting and analysis of data, and the flexibility of providing the data when appropriate.

Dr. Lakha believes it is imperative to be aware of different types of biases when producing academic work. This enables an author to acknowledge and address these in real-time, rather than reaching erroneous conclusions from ambiguous data. Collaboration with members of the research team also allows a failsafe mechanism to ensure that work produced is screened for overt bias. Finally, compliance with internationally recognized reporting standards, such as CONSORT, allows for standardization of the reporting of clinical research findings, thus providing a framework to produce high-quality scientific work.

“I find academic writing extremely rewarding. This includes grant proposals, manuscript drafting and editing, and peer review for surgical academic journals. As a clinician, it is imperative to manage time effectively, balancing clinical commitments with academic responsibilities. I often find wider reading for academic work provides me with greater depth in my clinical acumen, and gives scientific context to the decisions made at the bedside. Improving patient care and advancing our scientific understanding of the basis of disease are ultimately my motivating factors as an academic clinician, and as I progress through my career, I hope to utilize these as drivers for success, recognizing the need to adapt and evolve as a future leader in my field of interest,” says Dr. Lakha.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Igor Monsellato

Dr. Igor Monsellato is a senior colorectal and robotic surgeon at AOU SS. Antonio e Biagio e Cesare Arrigo Hospital in Alessandria, Italy. He has performed over 300 robotic procedures, with a strong focus on advanced colorectal surgery, including oncologic resections and complex minimally invasive approaches. His clinical work is guided by a commitment to standardization, technical precision, and the safe evolution of robotic techniques. He has published in leading journals such as Colorectal Disease, Annals of Surgical Oncology, and BMC Cancer, and contributed to international surgical textbooks and video atlases. His academic work explores how structured, anatomy-guided dissection and refined robotic strategies can improve reproducibility, reduce variability, and support meaningful surgical training. His interests lie in redefining technique through multi-quadrant access, vessel-preserving workflows, and stepwise operative models — always aiming to bridge innovation with practical teaching. He is also engaged in mentoring and international collaboration.

In Dr. Monsellato’s view, a valuable paper does not just report results — it teaches. It must be grounded in clinical experience, technically detailed, and methodologically sound. For him, the most useful papers are those that describe how a procedure is performed, why certain choices were made, and how outcomes can be improved or standardized. Clarity, honesty, and reproducibility matter more than elegance. A good paper should leave the reader with something they can apply or challenge.

Dr. Monsellato believes that authors should write like surgeons, not just scientists. They should focus on what others need to know if they want to replicate their methods. It is important to explain the rationale behind their techniques, respect the anatomy involved, and provide details that make a significant difference. Never conceal complications; transparency is essential for progress. He also thinks that surgical writing should have structure, clarity, and a sense of responsibility toward the younger generation reading it tomorrow.

“Stay honest, stay generous. Sharing your experience — even if imperfect — helps the field evolve. Publishing is not about proving something; it’s about contributing to collective growth. In robotic surgery especially, details and clarity matter. If you have developed or refined something useful, write it down. Someone else will benefit. In the long run, the true impact comes from sharing what we learn, not from keeping it to ourselves,” says Dr. Monsellato.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Ernest Cheng

Dr. Ernest Cheng is a surgical trainee based in Sydney, currently training through St George, Liverpool, and Campbelltown Hospitals. He is affiliated with the University of New South Wales and the Innovation, Surgical Teaching and Research (iSTAR) unit in South West Sydney, led by Dr. Scott Mackenzie, Dr. Assad Zahid, and Dr. Mina Sarofim. His research journey is still in its early stages, with projects largely shaped by the surgical units he has worked in. These projects have focused on cytoreductive surgery, pelvic exenteration, and colorectal surgery. As the trainee representative for the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, he has also been actively involved in projects focusing on surgical education and trainee development. Recently, his focus has turned towards colorectal surgery, where he hopes to pursue a career within the field long term.

ASJ: Why do we need academic writing?

Dr. Cheng: During surgical training, I have often observed that much of what we do in clinical practice is transmitted anecdotally—from mentors, personal experience, or habits that simply “seem effective.” While we frequently talk about the importance of evidence-based practice, surgery can still be heavily influenced by tradition and individual judgment. Academic writing plays a vital role in formalizing these practices, offering a way to prove- or disprove- approaches so that change and progress can occur. It provides a structured platform to validate methods, share insights, and critically assess outcomes. In today’s digital age, research is more accessible than ever, allowing ideas to be widely read, challenged, and refined. Ultimately, academic writing helps establish a common language for presenting data, enabling surgeons worldwide to contribute to and benefit from the continuous advancement of surgical knowledge.

ASJ: How can one ensure that their writing is critical?

Dr. Cheng: Growing up, we were always taught to ask the 5Ws and H: Who, what, when, where, why, and how. In academic writing, being critical is less about the journal name, author, or institutional affiliation and more about whether the content truly engages with these deeper questions. Critical writing means asking: Why does this topic matter? How does it build on or challenge existing knowledge? What are the real-world implications? A strong piece of writing doesn’t just present data; it reflects on the study’s strengths and limitations, considers alternative viewpoints, and encourages thoughtful discussion. Overly definitive conclusions are often scrutinized, so acknowledging bias and maintaining transparency are important. Critical writing is about honest, reflective analysis that contributes meaningfully to the conversation.

ASJ: Is there an interesting story from your academic writing that you would like to share with us?

Dr. Cheng: My initial experience with surgical research started at the peritonectomy unit in St George Hospital. This department, led by Prof. Morris, has shaped many surgical trainees and fellows to select careers in both surgery and research. I recall working on novel applications of a drug developed by the unit on infected meshes, which yielded promising results. When I asked where we should aim to publish the findings, the response was somewhat unexpected: it was never about “where”, but “when”—the final “W” that’s often overlooked. The priority wasn’t a well-known, prestigious journal, but ensuring the research was published and that insight could be shared with the surgical community, and to ultimately improve care. That perspective has influenced how I view academic writing to this day.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Raffaele De Marco

Dr. Raffaele De Marco is a Neurosurgeon and Spine Surgeon who completed a top-rated residency at the University of Turin. His career is defined by a dedicated pursuit of excellence in complex cranial surgery, with deep sub-specialty interests in Skull Base Surgery, Neuro-oncology, Vascular Neurosurgery, and Spine Surgery. His training has been intentionally international, featuring significant experiences at leading European institutions, the most recent of which was a six-month internship in Skull Base Surgery under Prof. Sébastien Froelich in Paris. He has hands-on experience in over 700 surgeries and has perfected endoscopic techniques for skull base pathologies. Currently, he practices minimally invasive spine surgery at the Robotic Spine Surgery Unit in Humanitas Gavazzeni, Bergamo, Italy. He remains actively engaged in research and has recently enrolled in the Bioengineering and Medical-Surgical Sciences PhD Program, jointly organized by Politecnico di Torino and the University of Turin, where he is advancing a research project focused on vestibular schwannoma.

In Dr. De Marco’s view, a good academic paper is a compelling scientific story built on a foundation of a novel hypothesis. He believes that a story does not always need to be original or something that has never been written before. In some cases, retelling or reproducing a narrative from others within your own context can still contribute to the scientific community. Knowing how to improvise with few resources can be worth telling. Validated case reports can serve as evidence that the diagnostic and therapeutic decisions made by doctors for specific patients are valuable to share. Detailed methodology for reproducibility, honestly and clearly presented results, and a powerful discussion that interprets findings, acknowledges limitations, and defines their significance are essential elements in supporting these “stories”.

Dr. De Marco asserts that authors need to balance their roles as meticulous scientists and strategic storytellers. This begins with ambitious yet realistic data collection and a clear-eyed strategy for publication, ensuring effort is focused efficiently. The narrative must consistently address the "So What?" factor, tailoring the paper's significance for a target journal and audience. Underpinning this entire process is an unwavering commitment to ethical rigor and an openness to iterative refinement through feedback.

“To my colleagues in research: while few of us will ever win a Nobel Prize, that is not the only measure of success. The true strength of our impact comes from the combined efforts of science as a whole.Every well-documented case, each negative result that guides others away from a dead end, and every incremental confirmation of a technique is an essential piece of the puzzle.We are building a robust edifice of knowledge, brick by brick. Our work may not always be glamorous, but its integrity and precision are what allow the entire field to advance reliably. Persevere in doing solid, honest science—it is the foundation upon which all future breakthroughs, by others or by ourselves, will ultimately stand,” says Dr. De Marco.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)