In 2024, CCO reviewers continue to 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.
January, 2024
Daniel Breadner, Schulich School of Medicine, Canada
May, 2024
Claudia Collà Ruvolo, University of Naples “Federico II”, Italy
January, 2024
Daniel Breadner
Dr. Dan Breadner, MD, FRCPC, is clinical researcher, medical oncologist and assistant professor at the London Regional Cancer Program at the Schulich School of Medicine. He treats lung and gastrointestinal cancers and has a research interest in translational and clinical research focusing on targeted therapy, liquid biopsies and immunomodulation. Connect with him on X @DrDanBreadner.
When reviewing clinical research, Dr. Breadner tries to both assess the validity of the paper and edit the manuscript to make it better. When editing, he would keep himself engaged on every point, allowing him to analyze the details better. Of course, it is important to assess the methods and to critically analyze the manuscript, but he would like to think that all papers he recommends for publication are stronger after the review.
Dr. Breadner thinks it is important to consider peer reviewing to be a part of the job. Noting that manuscripts may not be published by the first journal they are submitted to, he sets a minimum of two peer reviews for each manuscript he submits. He adds, “Without reviewers’ knowledge, dissemination would stop, so it is fair. The harder aspect is that reviewing requires focused time, so it competes for time with the other projects that often get done outside of normal workhours.”
(By Lareina Lim, Brad Li)
May, 2024
Claudia Collà Ruvolo
Dr. Claudia Collà Ruvolo completed all her studies at the University of Naples “Federico II” in Italy. Throughout her residency program, she had the opportunity to travel extensively. In her second year, she undertook a research fellowship in Montreal, Canada, where she delved into the field of Urology Oncology. This experience honed her biostatistics skills, equipping her with the ability to analyse data, produce results, and write and revise entire manuscripts effectively. Subsequently, she spent a year in Belgium focusing on robotic surgery training. Working at a leading European training centre, Dr. Ruvolo gained hands-on experience in procedures such as radical prostatectomy and radical or partial nephrectomy. Her recent projects center around robotic surgery in the field of urology, particularly emphasizing, surgical techniques, training process and comparing new robotic platforms available in the market. Connect with her on X @collaruvolo_c.
Dr. Ruvolo thinks that the peer-review process is crucial for ensuring the quality of publications. Furthermore, it plays a key role in enhancing the knowledge of reviewers themselves on specific topics. However, in her opinion, the role of the reviewer should be more clearly defined to enhance the quality of the review process.
Biases are inevitable in peer review. In Dr. Rovolo’s view, the review process should be bolstered to emphasize its significance in the context of a curriculum vitae (CV). Therefore, high-quality and substantial numbers of reviews should carry varying degrees of importance when considering one's experiences on a CV.
(by Lareina Lim, Brad Li)
