In 2024, many AOJ 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 (2024)

Robert F. LaPrade, University of Minnesota, USA

Michela Saracco, University of Naples “Federico II”, Italy

Zachary J. Herman, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, USA

Jeffery D. St. Jeor, Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist, USA

Daniel J. Cognetti, Brooke Army Medical Center, USA

Ryohei Uchida, Kansai Rosai Hospital, Japan

Prashant Meshram, The Apollo Group of Hospitals, India

Outstanding Author

Robert F. LaPrade

Robert F. LaPrade, MD, PhD, is a complex knee surgeon who practices at Twin Cities Orthopedics in Edina in Eagan, Minnesota, USA. In addition, he is an adjunct professor at the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at the University of Minnesota. He is known as a specialized clinician-scientist who has utilized his comprehensive research on sports medicine to improve patient care and invent novel ways to treat knee pathology. Many of the surgeries that he has devised have been performed worldwide. He has special expertise in treating posterolateral knee injuries, PCL tears, revision ACL reconstructions, meniscal repairs and transplants, MCL injuries, multiple ligament knee injuries, knee osteotomies, fresh osteoarticular allografts, and other difficult and revision complex knee injuries. While being a full-time clinician, Dr. LaPrade is also actively involved with bench-to-bedside research. He and his group have published more than 675 peer-reviewed scientific papers and over 125 book chapters and have given over 1,000 professional presentations. They have won many national and international research awards. He is also recognized internationally as an outstanding mentor and teacher, having been chosen to be a course chair for many national and international courses, as well as having been awarded multiple teaching awards presented by residents and fellows. In addition, he has mentored international fellows from all continents. Visit Dr. LaPrade’s homepage here.

One of the most commonly encountered difficulties in academic writing, in Dr. LaPrade’s view, is to know one’s audience. Each journal has a unique writing style that is specific to that journal. Understanding the flow, whether they prefer things to be written in first or third person, and also the general layouts of academic writing for a particular journal can be key to getting a paper accepted or not. In addition, when one starts out initially, young writers often try to present as much information as they can to demonstrate that they have a knowledge of the field. Unfortunately, this can kill one’s academic submission because in general, a short and to-the-point manuscript has a much greater chance of being accepted for the peer-reviewed literature than one that goes into exquisite detail about a topic. As one gets better at writing academic works, developing an Introduction that is one page or less, having a succinct Methods section, presenting the results in the Results section either in the text or the figures and not in both, then having a Discussion section that starts out with “the most important finding of this study was…” are keys to presenting ones’ work in a manner that has the best chance of being accepted.

In view of this, Dr. LaPrade points out that a key to addressing difficulties in academic writing is understanding the sources. What he means is that one should always go back to the original source rather than papers that may have quoted it further down the line when referencing work in one’s manuscript. In addition, referring to works in higher cited peer-reviewed journals should take preference over case reports and surgical technique papers. One does not always have to have an exhaustive synthesis of works on a particular topic, but one should ensure that the most highly regarded journals in one’s field have references that take preference over book chapters, case reports and technique papers when one is summarizing the Introduction and the Discussion sections. If one tries to include too much information, sometimes reviewers will feel that “what is the purpose of this work if it has already been done?”. Therefore, he indicates that having a proper balance of new information from one’s current work with what has been published previously and the questions that were still remaining that were addressed by one’s current work is an appropriate way to try and synthesize the evidence on a particular topic.

Lastly, Dr. LaPrade highlights that it is important for authors to disclose their conflicts of interest (COIs), especially if the topic involves an area in which an author may have a specific relationship with a company. In particular, if authors are paid to write a manuscript, this should be noted as part of the information under the COIs. However, it is important to recognize the majority of high-level successful surgeons do have relationships with orthopedic companies, which may or may not influence the manner in which they present their data. Therefore, understanding who may have a relationship with a specific company and whether that company’s products are being promoted is important when one does evaluate a work by an author that may have a COI on that particular topic.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

Michela Saracco

Dr. Michela Saracco, MD, is an Orthopaedic and Traumatology surgeon. Her practice is based in Rome and Naples, Italy. She attended the Catholic University of Rome “Sacro Cuore” where she obtained her medical degree and then the certification as a specialist in Orthopaedics and Traumatology. She has specific expertise in traumatology, hip surgery, musculoskeletal ultrasound, ultrasound-guided procedures, microsurgery and limb salvage surgery, and hand surgery. She is involved in clinical, teaching and research activities. She is also attending the PhD at the University of Naples “Federico II”. A list of Dr. Saracco’s research work can be accessed here. Follow her on Facebook.

In Dr. Saracco’s opinion, the essential elements of a good scientific paper are: originality of the topic, methodological rigor, particular clarity and plain language. She explains, “Our paper will influence clinical practice and future research. We, therefore, have a moral duty to offer an exhaustive and correctly conducted scientific work.” When preparing a paper, authors must have clear objectives. The aim is to optimize the researcher’s efforts to give a clear answer to the research questions.

In addition, Dr. Saracco believes that data sharing is the basis of scientific research and dissemination of knowledge. Therefore, high-quality scientific production should be accessible to all for free. “Only in this way will we be truly able to increase our knowledge and find inspiration for tomorrow's research,” adds she.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

Zachary J. Herman

Zachary Herman is a PGY3 Orthopaedic Surgery resident at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. Apart from his clinical duties as a resident, he spends time performing mostly clinical research in the Sports Medicine subspecialty. His research is centered around ACL and multi-ligament reconstruction, meniscal repair/transplantation, shoulder instability, and rotator cuff pathology. He has also spent time performing biomechanical research at the University of Pittsburgh’s Orthopaedic Robotics Lab, where he is studying the effects of individualizing capsular plication in patients with shoulder instability. After residency, he is looking forward to pursuing a career in academic sports medicine, where he will work clinically while educating future surgeons and performing clinical research.

In Dr. Herman’s opinion, the key skill sets of an author are first developing relevant and answerable research questions. From there, proper study design and analysis is mandatory in order to accurately interpret results and draw meaningful, accurate conclusions. Avoiding biases, on the other hand, is important. In the context of clinical research, presenting findings honestly and accurately should be the priority, regardless of preexisting thoughts or opinions. Only with objective reporting of outcomes will the orthopaedic literature grow and allow surgeons to provide the most optimum evidence-based care for patients.

“Personally, research provides an opportunity to improve outcomes for patients. While we clinically care for patients daily in the office or operating room, research and academic writing provide a way to promote the best care for patients in the future. Academic writing also imparts means for the education of medical students and other trainees. As so many people have given their time and effort to help me along my journey to becoming an orthopaedic surgeon thus far, I find it important to pay this forward, and I am motivated to provide the most optimal care for patients and set an example for other trainees. As such, I see academic writing and research as a part of residency training and a future career that supplies an additional avenue towards enhancing patient care and the learning experience of others in the field of orthopaedic surgery,” says Dr. Herman.

(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)

Jeffery D. St. Jeor

Jeffery D. St. Jeor, MD, is currently PGY-4 at Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist in Winston-Salem, NC. He enjoys dedicating his scholarly time to clinically based research on Sports Medicine. His areas of interest within Sports Medicine are in knee pathology, including ACL or multi-ligament reconstruction, meniscal repair or transplant, malalignment such as genu valgum/varum, and patellofemoral instability. His upper extremity interests include glenohumeral instability and total shoulder arthroplasty in the setting of fracture or glenohumeral arthritis. He is also interested in access to healthcare and healthcare disparities, especially among non-English speaking patients. This has led to research in health literacy among English and Spanish-speaking patients. After residency, he hopes to practice in underserved areas to provide much-needed orthopedic care to those who face barriers to healthcare access.

Dr. St. Jeor thinks growth in medicine and medical knowledge is a communal effort. The best chance for progress is through collaboration, and academic writing helps accomplish that. He believes, especially in the day of digital information and sharing, it helps bridge gaps that previously prevented cross-institutional and global progression. In his view, for centuries, academic writing has allowed for advancements in medicine to occur at a much faster pace improving patient care. Otherwise, medicine would progress in isolated silos, and authors would still be stuck on the humors of the body.

Speaking of how to ensure his writing is critical, Dr. St. Jeor shares, “It starts with the reason for writing. Critical writing is the byproduct of meaningful scholarly inquiry. If we are striving to answer a question for the progression of medicine and improving patient care or safety, that will serve as the linchpin for critical inquiry and critical writing will be the natural byproduct. We can’t let individual agendas or ‘expert opinion’ impede critical writing and data.”

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Daniel J. Cognetti

Daniel J. Cognetti is an orthopaedic surgeon in the United States Army. He is stationed in San Antonio, Texas at the United States Army Institute of Surgical Research as a Clinician Scientist and is Associate Program Director for Research within the Department of Orthopaedic Surgery at Brooke Army Medical Center. He is a teaching faculty on the Orthopaedic Sports Medicine Service and an Assistant Professor at Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. His clinical and research interests include shoulder stabilization procedures, irreparable rotator cuff tears, blood flow restriction therapy, multi-ligamentous knee injuries, compartment syndrome and combat casualty care.

In Dr. Cognetti’s view, academic writing is essential to clinical advancement as it facilitates the dissemination of research findings, allowing surgeons and researchers to share their discoveries, methodologies, and insights with the global orthopaedic community. This systematic documentation of knowledge ensures that each successive achievement or bit of knowledge builds on the previous one, creating a cumulative advancement of understanding in the field. In this way, academic writing is a running narrative, where authors acknowledge the foundation laid by others while providing a roadmap to follow and build upon. This not only facilitates innovation but can also foster collaboration.

There are several ways Dr. Cognetti stays up to date and engages in orthopaedic discourse to ensure his own writing is current and insightful. He reviews for four orthopaedic journals, attends several annual conferences each year, and perhaps most importantly, regularly participates in clinical discussions with residents, peers, and mentors across the country. These interactions allow him to explore unanswered questions, challenge unproven truths, and critically examine orthopaedic dogma and imperfect practices. Identifying gaps in current understanding and clinical questions or problems worth solving is the critical first step in research. He believes by staying immersed in these conversations and continuously updating one’s knowledge, an author can ensure that writing not only reflects the latest advancements but also contributes meaningfully to the ongoing dialogue in the field.

“While writing my undergraduate honors thesis in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, my lab PI decided that we should all watch a documentary entitled, Naturally Obsessed: The Making of a Scientist. I immediately identified with the graduate students in the film describing this innate sense of purpose and accomplishment that comes from answering a scientific inquiry. This natural obsession has been the main motivator in my scientific career and within orthopaedics, this sense of purpose has only continued to grow, inspired by surgical challenges and successes, as well as the potential to make a tangible impact on patients,” says Dr. Cognetti.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Ryohei Uchida

Ryohei Uchida is an orthopaedic surgeon specializing in sports medicine who serves as Chief of Orthopaedic Sports Medicine for Kansai Rosai Hospital in Amagasaki, Japan. As a graduate of Nagoya University School of Medicine (2002), he completed his orthopaedic residencies at Nagoya University and Osaka University, and earned his PhD from Osaka University in 2014. He is currently working as a clinician, mainly treating sports injuries, while conducting clinical research on meniscus and knee ligament injuries (e.g., radial tears of the lateral meniscus or two-stage revision ACL reconstructions), as well as on the mechanism of sports injuries for injury prevention. He serves as an editorial board member of the BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders and ISAKOS newsletters, and is an active member of several international orthopaedic societies (e.g., ISAKOS). Connect with Dr. Uchida on Facebook.

In Dr. Uchida’s view, the most essential element of a good academic paper is the presentation of new findings and messages that are not found in earlier literature and that can lead to better medical treatment. These findings should be developed through logical discussion and conclusions, based on clear objectives and research questions with appropriate methodologies, and grounded with comprehensive literature reviews. To him, an important part of the process of writing a successful paper is discussion with colleagues as well as objective and unbiased data analysis. The thoroughness of this analytical component can be instrumental in developing a compelling paper. Lastly, he points out that sharing research data with other researchers is crucial because it accelerates the advancement of knowledge and medical developments. 

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Prashant Meshram

Dr. Prashant Meshram is a full-time Consultant Shoulder Surgeon at The Apollo Group of Hospitals, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad, India. He completed his Orthopedics residency at The KEM Hospital, Mumbai, India. He went on for shoulder surgery fellowship at The Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, South Korea. Subsequently, he was awarded The JW Marriott Shoulder Research fellowship at the prestigious Johns Hopkins Institute of Medicine, Maryland, USA. Dr. Meshram is a decorated author in field of shoulder orthopedic surgery having authored over 55 published research articles and book chapters in indexed international journals. He represents India at the global orthopedic academia stage being on the Editorial Board of Clinical Orthopedics & Related Research as an Associate Editor and as a board member of The American Journal of Sports Medicine. He is also one of few International corresponding members of American Shoulder & Elbow Surgeons from the South Asia region. Follow Dr. Meshram on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, ResearchGate and Google Scholar. His homepage can be found here.

AOJ: What role does academic writing play in science?

Dr. Meshram: I strongly believe that academic writing is a corner pillar of scientific advancement and our understanding of human evolution. One of my mentors always said, if it is not documented, it is not done. Academic writing allows doctors and scientists to share their discoveries, methodologies, and results with the broader scientific community. Peer review in academic writing ensures the integrity and reliability of the scientific work. Academic articles, books, and reviews are essential tools for educating students and training future scientists. Well-written scientific papers can impact public policy, healthcare guidelines, and industrial practices by providing evidence-based recommendations. As a physician taking care of people, we must keep learning about the latest discoveries to be able to provide the best and latest evidence-based medicine. Personally, being on editorial board of prominent journals like CORR and AJSM gives me a unique opportunity to review latest research in my field and accumulate best knowledge for betterment of my patients.

AOJ: How to ensure one’s writing is critical?

Dr. Meshram: Even the best performed research may not be impactful if it is not presented well. Scientific writing is an art that requires skill training and perseverance. Critical writing is perhaps the most key element that gives authenticity and reliability to readers. Academic writing must be comprehensive yet concise; meticulous yet not narcoleptic. There are several basic rules that I live by while writing a manuscript. First, one must read what has been published on the topic comprehensively to identify the gaps. Choose to identify and read high-quality, peer-reviewed research. Ensure the methodology used is valid and reliable; cite previous similar articles to provide authenticity. It is better to compare and analyze the study findings against those from previous similar studies. One must anticipate and address the counterarguments in Discussion. Use precise, neutral terms to maintain professionalism and express points logically, with clear transitions. Lastly, I always encourage peers or mentors to critique my work before submitting it to a journal. Combining a thorough understanding with analytical rigor ensures that your work stands out.

AOJ: Why is it important for a research to apply for institutional review board (IRB) approval?

Dr. Meshram: I believe preapproval of any original research with IRB is as important as law and order in a civil society. IRB protects the participants by ensuring adherence to ethical standards, safeguarding participants’ rights, safety, and well-being. IRB also standardizes the approval process of research, making it reliable and reproducible. Ethical oversight reinforces credibility and fosters trust in the research process. IRB approvals also facilitates trust and funding for research. The consequences of omitting IRB approval could be disastrous with harm to participants, leading to legal and moral repercussions. Research without IRB approval could be deemed unethical and invalid; also difficult to get accepted in a reputed journal. The researcher and institution could face significant credibility loss. Researchers may face penalties for non-compliance with ethical guidelines. Obtaining IRB approval is essential to uphold ethical standards and ensure credible, impactful research. Overall, IRB process promotes scientific integrity by avoiding unethical practices.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)