In 2025, 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 (2025)

Jonathan D. Hughes, University of Pittsburgh, USA

Jordan Eskenazi, University of Miami, USA

Eric N. Bowman, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, USA

Joseph Lyons, Wright State University, USA

Whisper Grayson, Loyola University Health System, USA

Jonathan Harley, University of Cincinnati, USA

Doria Weiss, New York Medical College, USA

Jelle P. van der List, The Ohio State University, USA

Rick Joreitz, University of Pittsburg, USA

Mina Entessari, Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center, USA

Hayley C. Urreiztieta, University of New Mexico, USA

Outstanding Author

Jonathan D. Hughes

Jonathan D. Hughes is an Assistant Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery at the University of Pittsburgh and a team physician for the football team of the University of Pittsburgh. He specializes in the care of athletes as well as complex knee and shoulder surgery, with a specific focus on shoulder and knee arthroscopy, shoulder arthroplasty, and complex reconstructive and open surgery of the shoulder and the knee. He is actively involved in various clinical outcome studies, both retrospective and prospective, at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) as a principal investigator and co-investigator.  He has been awarded various internal grants for his research. Additionally, in collaboration with the Biodynamics Laboratory at the University of Pittsburgh, he serves as the Principal Investigator for the Young Investigator Grant offered by the American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine for a biodynamics study investigating knee kinematics after slope correcting osteotomy and revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). He is serving as a co-investigator for several nationally-funded, multicenter studies including the STaR Trial, STABILITY 2 Trial, POETT and NIMBL Studies. In another collaboration with the Biodynamics Laboratory at the University of Pittsburgh, he, along with several colleagues, is researching on shoulder kinematics, arthrokinematics, and clinical outcomes after superior capsule reconstruction, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, and shoulder labral repair. Learn more about Dr. Hughes here, and connect with him on X and Instagram.

AOJ: What role does academic writing play in science?

Dr. Hughes: Academic writing and research are the foundation for continued growth within our profession. Clinical decision-making should be research- and evidence-based, highlighting the scientific merit and importance of academic writing and research. I believe that academic writing and research are an essential component of an academic surgeon's calling.

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

Dr. Hughes: An important aspect of critical evaluation is staying up-to-date on current literature, which means constant and continued learning. This also translates into clinical practice, as clinical decision making should be based on current literature and recommendations. I constantly read new and innovative articles, attend conferences, and peer review for several international journals, which all assist in keeping me updated on current literature and recommendations. This ultimately allows me to be critical of my own work. As well, being in an academic setting, I constantly reach out to colleagues for feedback and constructive criticism, allowing me to improve in all aspects of my academic practice.

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

Dr. Hughes: The IRB is a safe-guard to help protect patients as well as the integrity of the research methods for each study. The IRB is an essential component of research, one that shouldn't be taken lightly or omitted. When the IRB is not involved, there is a significant risk of bias and loss of scientific rigor, though unintentional. The IRB can review the research process with an unbiased eye to ensure that appropriate methodology and patient protections are in place.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Jordan Eskenazi

Jordan Eskenazi is a third-year medical student at the University of Miami in the MD/MS in the Genomic Medicine program. Beginning with his time as a clinical research assistant prior to medical school, he has focused his research in the Sports Medicine subspecialty. During the period at medical school, he has been involved with the biomechanics lab at the University of Miami. Currently, in addition to his biomechanics and Sports Medicine research, he focuses on AI applications in orthopedic surgery, with his most recent publication looking at Retrieval Augmented Generation and ChatGPT’s ability to answer orthopedic examination assessment questions. He is looking forward to applying for Orthopedic residency and plans to pursue career in academic sports medicine.  

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

Jordan: Ensuring your writing is critical starts from understanding how to break down a study. If you are citing a study in your paper, you must fully understand the methods and statistics of the cited paper, as well as be able to come to your own conclusions, not just repackage what the original authors stated in their discussion. Further, you must include all sides of a specific topic in your own writing, and draw your own conclusions based on the data that you have access to. This is why it is critical to at least have a basic understanding of statistics if you are engaging in academic writing, as this is the only way to properly understand research. If you are rigorous with your analysis, your writing will inevitably be critical.

AOJ: Is it important for authors to disclose Conflict of Interest (COI)?

Jordan: It is essential for authors to disclose COI. While I do not think that authors intentionally deceive with their research, there are significant inherent biases that authors do not even realize when they are conducting research or writing papers. Disclosing all of your COIs to the readers allows the readers to take a step back and analyze the paper knowing there is a potential bias in the methodology or results. It is critical to know this upfront, so the readers can properly evaluate the paper to ascertain whether the results are generalizable to their population.

AOJ: Academic writing takes a lot of time and effort. What motivates you to do so?

Jordan: The foundation of academic writing should stem from the author’s own curiosity. There are so many unanswered questions in medicine, and research and academic writing are the means of answering these questions. Given my young position in the medical profession, there is so much I don’t know, and there is even more that I don’t even know that I don’t know, so every paper is an amazing opportunity for me to learn. This motivates me to continue seeking out research opportunities and drives me to formulate proper questions that need to be answered. I have gained a tremendous amount of knowledge about medicine, orthopedics, the scientific method, AI applications in medicine and more all from academic writing that I would not have acquired if I had not been involved in research. My motivation is then only compounded by the fact that every paper I contribute is adding to the ever-growing body of literature used to provide the best possible care to patients.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Eric N. Bowman

Dr. Eric N. Bowman is an Associate Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery, specializing in Sports Medicine, at Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee. He earned his medical degree from the University of Cincinnati, completed Orthopaedic residency at Campbell Clinic / University of Tennessee, followed by Sports Medicine fellowship at Kerlan-Jobe / Cedars Sinai in Los Angeles, CA. He is the head team physician for the Nashville Sounds (AAA) baseball team and is a consultant for the Milwaukee Brewers (MLB); he also serves as a team physician for Vanderbilt University and local high schools. Dr. Bowman has initiated a multicenter study group researching sports-related elbow injuries, particularly elbow UCL injuries, funded by Major League Baseball. He is the Associate Director of Sports Education at Vanderbilt Orthopaedics. He lectures nationally, particularly regarding overhead and throwing athletes. In his spare time, he enjoys being outdoors with his family and has become an avid triathlete. Learn more about him here, and connect with him on Instagram and X.

AOJ: What are the most commonly encountered difficulties in academic writing?

Dr. Bowman: I teach to always begin with the end in mind. What are the conclusions you need and how are you going to get there? What study approach and statistical methods are necessary (consult a librarian / statistician at the beginning)? Too often, trainees jump into a project without adequate planning, only to realize at the end. During the writing process, it is important to focus on your conclusions and frame the manuscript around them. What are the practical applications the readers need to know? Be sure to lead back to them throughout. Keep the readers engaged by being concise; every sentence must add value!

AOJ: The burden of being a scientist/doctor is heavy. How do you allocate time to write papers?

Dr. Bowman: Focus on an area you enjoy and you’ll look forward to your research! I thrive in a team environment and students/trainees are great to work with. I enjoy sitting down with them and coming up with interesting questions and figuring out how we can best answer them. You will make time for the things that are important, and while research can be arduous, it is gratifying to see your or your students’ hard work rewarded.

AOJ: What is fascinating about academic writing?

Dr. Bowman: Contributing to the literature on a given topic is a way of not only enhancing your own understanding but also benefiting the greater academic community as a whole. I enjoy solving questions spurned from previous projects, which in turn generates new questions. It significantly deepens my understanding of a topic so I can better educate my patients, colleagues, and trainees, and provide information for others to do the same.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Joseph G. Lyons

Joseph Lyons is currently a PGY-5 orthopedic surgery resident at Wright State University in Dayton, Ohio, USA, and he will complete a Sports Medicine fellowship at Beacon Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine after the residency training. He has previously worked on basic research evaluating nanotechnology-based biomaterials for bone regeneration applications. His current primary research interests are related to the epidemiology of various musculoskeletal injuries, with a focus on tendon ruptures in athletics and on fractures in the elderly population.

AOJ: What are the qualities an author should possess?

Joseph: In my opinion, some of the most important qualities an author should possess include attention to detail, integrity, and perseverance. A well-designed, well-executed, and well-presented study has the ability to change the way we practice and the way we treat the individuals who come to us for help. Each study provides a foundation upon which additional work and advancements can be made. As a community, we rely on and draw from the work of others to guide our own research, and together we advance the collective body of knowledge. Adherence to ethical guidelines and meticulous attention to detail throughout the process are critical so that authors can present accurate and responsible research upon which others can build and advance the field. Scientific work can be challenging, often requiring multiple refinements and revisions throughout the process, and authors must have determination, perseverance, and willingness to accept feedback in order to present the best version of their work to the scientific community.

AOJ: Do you think following reporting guidelines (e.g. STROBE, PRISMA, and CARE) is important?

Joseph: It’s critical to follow reporting guidelines during preparation of manuscripts. Scientific advancements are the result of the collective efforts of the entire research community, with each new discovery building upon the work and efforts of others. Authors should adhere to reporting guidelines when presenting their work in order to give a clear and complete account of the work that was done. This allows readers and other researchers to fully understand the research, so that the insights gained can be used most effectively by others to continue to grow the collective body of knowledge.

AOJ: How do you make time to write out of a packed schedule?

Joseph: Throughout training, I’ve always tried to set aside small chunks of time each week dedicated to working on scientific writing. This can sometimes be hard to do, and during especially busy weeks, the amount of time spent writing that week may seem small. However, I’ve found that when this is done consistently, week after week, the cumulative results can be great.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Whisper Grayson

Whisper Grayson, MD, graduated from the University of South Florida Morsani College of Medicine and recently completed a research fellowship with the adult reconstruction team at Loyola University Medical Center in Chicago. Her research has primarily been focused on joint arthroplasty and fracture management. Notable previous projects during medical school include a prospective trial evaluating the efficacy of topical antibiotic powder in the ED on reducing infection in open fractures, which won Orthopaedic Trauma Association highlight paper in 2022, as well as infection recurrence in shoulder arthroplasty, winner of the 2024 Charles S. Neer Award. More recently, her interests have shifted towards the applications of nanotechnology within orthopaedic surgery, especially in the areas of cartilage regeneration and fracture healing. She is applying for residency in orthopaedic surgery with plans of having an academic career in orthopaedic trauma where she will work clinically as well as continue conducting research. Follow Dr. Grayson on Research Gate.

A good academic paper, in Dr. Grayson’s view, is centered on a focused and well-defined research question that offers novel insight into its field. The paper should follow a logical structure with strong, reproducible methodology, tying in current literature.

According to Dr. Grayson, a commonly encountered difficulty in academic writing is translating the clinical importance of a topic based off of the data collected during the study. To offset this difficulty, having an in-depth understanding of the topic and a clear research question from the inception of the project is essential. This allows for a well-developed methodology and robust statistical analysis, as well as creating a timeline sufficient to collect the necessary data and sample size. Taking these steps allows for the statistical relevance of the project to be more easily translated into clinical relevance.

Dr. Grayson believes that academic writing has the ability to transform ideas into structured and persuasive arguments, holding the potential to improve patient care in the clinical setting. Academic writing extends beyond just presenting facts, requiring critical thinking to construct meaningful findings with evidence-based research. Research and academic writing aids heavily in improving patient outcomes and further advancing medicine. “As a student, I had the opportunities to see my research in action clinically, further imparting the potential it holds in optimizing patient care. As such, I look forward to continuing my research endeavors throughout the rest of my training and career,” says she.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Jonathan D. Harley

Jonathan Harley, BA, is a fourth-year medical student at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine. He also completed a year-long research fellowship at the University of Minnesota Medical School. His research efforts have primarily focused on topics in sports medicine and shoulder surgery, including outcomes after total and reverse shoulder arthroplasty, non-arthroplasty surgical treatments for irreparable rotator cuff tears, surgical management of anterior shoulder instability, and regional anesthesia in shoulder surgery. A former track and field athlete, he carries a passion for musculoskeletal medicine and plans to pursue a career in orthopaedic surgery, with the goal of continuing to contribute to sports medicine research throughout residency. Outside of his professional responsibilities, he is an avid long-distance runner and has competed in numerous organized races, including multiple half-marathons. Follow Jonathan on Instagram and X.

AOJ: What role does academic writing play in science?

Jonathan: Academic writing plays a critical role in allowing us as scientists to communicate our findings to our peers. If we cannot clearly and accurately convey our work to others, then our conclusions have little meaning. Solid academic writing bridges this gap between investigation and interpretation, enabling the scientific community to make meaning of the valuable research that we conduct.  

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

Jonathan: Ensuring one’s writing is critical involves a thorough investigation into the most recent literature regarding the topic in question. Specifically, a thorough literature review is the cornerstone to properly framing one’s investigation in the context of what is known. This avoids redundancy of scientific findings, and allows the writer to convey more accurately how the current investigation adds value to the literature.

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

Jonathan: The IRB approval process serves as a means of verifying the soundness of the study design and mitigating potential harm to patients involved in the research. If this process were omitted, both scientific rigor and patient safety would be at risk of being compromised. As researchers, we should respect the necessity of the IRB and ensure that studies receive approval when appropriate.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Doria L. Weiss

Doria Weiss is a fourth-year medical student at New York Medical College applying to orthopedic surgery residency. She recently completed a research fellowship with the Columbia University Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Division of Shoulder, Elbow, and Sports Medicine. Her research focuses on clinical outcomes and surgical techniques in sports medicine and shoulder surgery, including anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, osteochondral allograft transplantation, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, and rotator cuff repair. She has contributed to multiple projects evaluating biomechanics, patient-reported outcomes, and revision surgery, with work presented at national and international meetings.

A strong academic paper, according to Doria, is built on a clear research question, a sound study design, and rigorous methodology. It should present data transparently, with appropriate analyses, and situate the findings within the context of existing literature. Logical flow, clarity of writing, and well-structured sections are crucial. Finally, the paper should contribute novel insights or synthesize knowledge in a way that advances the field and improves patient outcomes.

In Doria’s view, authors must prioritize accuracy, reproducibility, and integrity throughout the research and writing process. Transparency in reporting methods and results is essential, as is careful avoidance of bias in analysis and interpretation. Beyond presenting findings, she thinks that authors should consider how their work fits into and contributes to the existing body of literature—clearly articulating its relevance, novelty, and potential to advance the field. This ensures the paper is not only methodologically sound but also impactful in guiding future research and improving clinical practice.

“As a young researcher, contributing to a respected, peer-reviewed orthopedic journal like AOJ makes me feel meaningful because it ensures our work would reach an audience of surgeons and researchers who are directly shaping patient care. I valued that AOJ emphasizes clinically relevant, high-quality research, which aligns with my own goal of producing work that not only advances the field academically but also has real impact in improving surgical outcomes,” says Doria.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Jelle P. van der List

Dr. Jelle van der List works as a double fellowship-trained Orthopaedic Surgeon specializing in sports medicine and complex knee injuries at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center and an Assistant-Professor at The Ohio State University. He earned his medical degree at the Free University in Amsterdam, prior to a research fellowship at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York and obtaining a PhD at the University of Amsterdam. He then completed his residency at the Amsterdam University Medical Centers, followed by two sports medicine fellowships at Wake Forest University and Ohio State University while finishing his MBA at Johns Hopkins University. Dr. van der List’s research interests are centered on knee injuries, particularly anterior cruciate ligament repair and reconstruction, timing of surgery and knee joint preservation. His work has been widely recognized with over 175 publications and 6,000 citations. He is an associate editor for The Knee and editorial board member for Arthroscopy Journal. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

In Dr. van der List’s opinion, a good academic paper is complete, high-quality, and free of major flaws. It begins with relevant research questions that fill a clear gap in the literature, explicitly stated in the introduction along with the study’s novel contribution. The methodology must be appropriate and adequately powered to answer those questions. In the results, sufficient sample size, correct statistical tests, and clear distinctions between correlation/causation and statistical/clinical significance are essential. The discussion—often the weakest section despite offering the most freedom—should thoroughly address potential reader questions, compare findings with prior literature or hypotheses, and explain discrepancies. Ultimately, a good paper excels in all these areas and is enjoyable to read.

According to Dr. van der List, the biggest challenge in academic writing is predicting—before starting—a project’s feasibility and publishability. Many student/resident-led projects start with enthusiasm that fades when data collection proves harder or less impactful than expected. Everything hinges on a strong research question. He always starts by imagining the final answer: “If our methods yield these results, would journals care?” He even drafts a potential title and abstract upfront to judge if the project is worth pursuing. Another common hurdle is selecting the right journal. With submission volumes rising everywhere, sending a paper to a poor-fit journal wastes months on a predictable rejection. Finally, projects must be managed proactively. After rejection or revision requests, authors often delay weeks or months before resubmitting. This should be avoided: unless new data are truly needed, keep the paper under active submission at all times.

“Academic writing is a joy because it is satisfying to create a research question and good methodological study that can answer a clinical problem and advance our field. I truly enjoy projects that have a direct clinical impact and contain data that surgeons can use to help their patients. I still enjoy being involved in the data analysis and interpretation as this is the core of the project: trying to understand the data and methodology, and what the data are telling us and how the methodology with inherent biases influences this. Really understanding the data is the core of academic writing. The paper will eventually be written, although there are many tips and tricks to make this process more efficient. It is critical to write a good and concise introduction that allows the reader an easy understanding of the project, and the academic freedom in the discussion should be used, albeit within limits,” says Dr. van der List.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Rick Joreitz

Rick Joreitz, PT, DPT, SCS, ATC, graduated from the University of Pittsburgh in 2005 with a Bachelor’s degree in Athletic Training, and then again in 2008 with his Doctor of Physical Therapy. In 2011, he became a Board-Certified Sports Clinical Specialist accredited by the American Board of Physical Therapy Specialties. Currently, he serves in a dual role as an Assistant Professor within the University of Pittsburgh Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Coordinator for the Pitt Football team. He is also the Director of the University of Pittsburgh Division 1 Sports Physical Therapy Fellowship. Prior to joining the Department of Physical Therapy, he worked as a physical therapist for the UPMC Rehabilitation Institute for 11 years and was the Team Physical Therapist for the Pittsburgh Penguins, covering their 2016 and 2017 Stanley Cup championship seasons.

AOJ: What are the essential elements of a good academic paper?

Dr. Joreitz: In my role as an Assistant Professor teaching physical therapy students, I update my lectures annually with the most up-to-date evidence-based research. From that standpoint, a good academic paper needs to be of sound methodology. Additionally, the peer-review process is crucial to ensure the paper meets quality standards. As a treating clinician, I search for papers that meet said standards but are also clinically applicable. There is value in finding papers that support the processes that are in place as well as those that challenge the status quo.

AOJ: What authors have to bear in mind during preparation of a paper?

Dr. Joreitz: The first and probably most obvious is time commitment. It is an intensive process but rewarding in the end. Secondly, it’s the effort required to produce a quality academic paper. Extensive research and reading are required to provide a thorough introduction and the author is responsible for clearly communicating their methods and results.

AOJ: Why do you choose to publish in AOJ?

Dr. Joreitz: I was excited when offered the opportunity to publish in AOJ. It is a peer-reviewed open access journal, which appeals to me as both a writer and reader. The Special Series is unique that incorporates an interdisciplinary approach to a specific topic.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Mina Entessari

Mina Entessari, MD, is a PGY-3 orthopaedic surgery resident at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Her research spans hip, knee, and shoulder Sports Medicine. Her hip research focuses on microfracture techniques augmented with allograft cartilage and platelet-rich plasma, evaluating outcomes and predictors of conversion to arthroplasty, as well as the use of mesenchymal stem cells for osteoarthritis. Her knee work includes risk factors for ACL and meniscal reinjury, patellar instability, outcomes of medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, and internal bracing in ACL reconstruction. Her current primary focus is anterior shoulder instability in surgically managed female patients, examining baseline characteristics and risk factors for recurrence. She plans to pursue a Sports Medicine fellowship and a career in academic medicine. Connect with her on X.

One of the biggest challenges in academic writing, in Dr. Entessari’s view, is defining a clear, focused objective. A strong objective anchors the entire project, guiding feasibility, methods, and the structure of the manuscript. The difficult part is identifying a question that adds genuine novelty to an already robust body of literature. Research should fill meaningful gaps and address unresolved problems, and finding that unique angle often requires the most thought and effort.

According to Dr. Entessari, balancing an orthopaedic residency with academic writing is challenging, especially with unpredictable hours. She tries to use lighter clinic days, dedicated research days, and unexpected openings in the schedule to make progress. To her, an organized research plan and a strong research team are essential; none of this work gets done alone. Collaboration and support make sustained productivity—and the recognition that comes with it—possible. Setting clear, short-term goals also keeps projects from stalling during busy stretches.

“Participating in research is a privilege, and academic writing makes that work accessible. It provides a way to present new ideas, contribute to scientific progress, and ultimately improve patient care. Writing forces clarity: it requires distilling complex concepts into precise, concise language and engaging in structured, evidence-based argument. The process is intellectually rewarding, and it has deepened my understanding of the topics I study, making me a better clinician and surgeon,” says Dr. Entessari.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Hayley C. Urreiztieta

Hayley C. Urreiztieta is a PGY-4 orthopaedic surgery resident at the University of New Mexico, USA. She is currently preparing to pursue fellowship training in orthopaedic sports medicine following completion of her residency. Her previous research spans clinically focused musculoskeletal and spine conditions, with projects on cervical spine trauma and ligamentous instability, skeletal sarcomas, and the learning curve for anterior total hip arthroplasty. She has also contributed to work on peripheral nerve entrapment and pain syndromes, as well as the medical management of opioid-induced constipation, reflecting a broad interest in optimizing diagnosis, treatment strategies, and patient outcomes across orthopaedic and perioperative care. Her current primary research interests include multiligament knee injuries, anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction, and optimizing rehabilitation and return-to-sport pathways for active patients.

AOJ: What role does academic writing play in science?

Dr. Urreiztieta: Academic writing is one of the ways we honor the responsibility we have to our patients and to one another as clinicians. It takes the questions that arise at the bedside or in the operating room and turns them into knowledge the entire field can learn from. Good writing doesn’t just report data—it creates clarity where there was uncertainty, and it allows others to build on what we have found. In orthopaedics, this means that our observations about ligament injuries, surgical techniques, or rehabilitation protocols become shared tools that help athletes and patients everywhere reclaim their lives. In that sense, academic writing is another form of service: a way to extend the impact of our work far beyond the walls of our own institution.

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

Dr. Urreiztieta: Being critical in writing begins with humility—the willingness to examine our own work as honestly as we would examine anyone else’s. I try to ask myself the same questions I learned to ask at the operating table: Why this approach? What are the risks? What am I not seeing? Critical writing requires stepping back, acknowledging limitations, and letting the data guide the story rather than the other way around. It also means placing the work in the broader landscape of what others have discovered, recognizing when our findings align with the literature and when they challenge existing assumptions. At its core, critical writing reflects a commitment to truth, to patients, and to the integrity of our field.

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

Dr. Urreiztieta: IRB approval is a safeguard rooted in the very values that brought many of us into medicine—protecting patients, honoring their trust, and ensuring that our pursuit of knowledge never comes at their expense. The IRB process ensures that studies are ethical, that risks are minimized, and that individuals’ rights and privacy are respected. It is the structure that allows patient-centered research to be carried out responsibly. When this step is skipped, something fundamental is lost. Patients may be put at risk, confidentiality may be compromised, and the credibility of the research—and the researcher—can be called into question. Journals may reject the work, institutions may impose sanctions, and more importantly, the trust between patients and the medical community can be damaged. IRB oversight is not a hurdle to clear; it is a reminder of the privilege we hold as clinicians and the duty we have to safeguard those we study and serve.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)