In 2024, TP 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
Yuan-Pang Wang, University of São Paulo, Brazil
January, 2024
Yuan-Pang Wang
Yuan-Pang Wang received his MD degree from the University of Sao Paulo Medical School, and his M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees from the Department of Psychiatry at the same institution. Since then, he has worked as a research associate in the Section of Psychiatric Epidemiology and has become a member of the International Federation of Psychiatric Epidemiology and the World Psychiatric Association. In 2014, he was recognized as one of the New Voices in Global Health during the World Health Summit. Currently, he is a collaborating member of the Global Burden of Disease Initiative. His research interests include population-based surveys (global health) of psychiatric disorders, non-communicable chronic diseases (obesity-related), and latent models applied to psychopathology. He also has an extensive editorial experience as Associate Editor for BMC Public Health, BMC Psychiatry, World Journal of Psychiatry, Frontiers in Psychiatry, Journal of Psychosomatic Research, and Brazilian Journal of Psychiatry. Learn more about him here.
TP: What are the limitations of the existing peer-review system?
Dr. Wang: The existing peer-review system, while being a cornerstone of scholarly publishing, has several limitations. Key limitations include the bias and subjectivity of peer reviewers in evaluating a manuscript, and the time-consuming peer-review process, which would delay the dissemination of research findings. As potential solutions, implementing transparent and open review processes, where the identity of reviewers is disclosed, can reduce biases and increase accountability. In addition, providing recognition, incentives, and compensation to reviewers can motivate them to invest more time and effort into the review process.
TP: The burden of being a scientist/doctor is heavy. How do you allocate time to do peer review?
Dr. Wang: Ultimately, this is about finding a balance that suits individual preferences, professional commitments and career goals. Prioritization and planning are essential to manage the workload. Overcommitment should be avoided, so set realistic limits on the number of reviews you will accept in a given timeframe. Developing personal policies regarding the types of manuscripts one is willing to review, the number of reviews accepted per month or year, and the criteria for accepting or declining reviews can help maintain a balanced workload.
TP: Is it important for authors to disclose Conflict of Interest (COI)?
Dr. Wang: Yes, it is critical that authors disclose COIs in their research publications. Full and transparent disclosure is essential to maintain the integrity and credibility of scientific and medical research. A COI arises when an author has financial, personal or professional interests that could influence their research or its interpretation.
(by Lareina Lim, Brad Li)
