In 2025, JECCM 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.
Tamas Dolinay, University of California Los Angeles, USA
Tamas Dolinay
Tamas Dolinay, MD, PhD, is a Clinical Associate Professor of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at the University of California Los Angeles, and serves as the Respiratory Director of Barlow Respiratory Hospital in Los Angeles, USA. He earned his medical degree from the University of Debrecen, Hungary, and completed his pulmonary and critical care specialization at the University of Pennsylvania, USA. As a basic scientist, his research focused on the molecular mechanisms of acute respiratory distress syndrome, work that culminated in a Ph.D. in immunology. His clinical practice centers on the care of patients with interstitial lung disease and survivors of critical illness, and he leads a research group dedicated to investigating the outcomes of prolonged mechanical ventilation.
JECCM: What do you regard as a healthy peer-review system?
Dr. Dolinay: In my view, peer review should follow the same standardized, systematic approach for all reviewers. This helps to eliminate bias, provide a predictable and fair process for the authors. Detailed guidelines published by journals can help writers how to format their manuscript more in line with the requirements, which in turn simplifies and speeds up review. I usually provide a review in 2 weeks.
JECCM: What reviewers have to bear in mind while reviewing papers?
Dr. Dolinay: It is important to know who is the audience of the journal. Even though I will follow the same professional guidelines for each review, I will tailor my review for a focused journal with the understanding that experts read it. For a non-pulmonary journal, I will request a broader background and a discussion which places the novelty of findings in the context of general medical sciences.
JECCM: Peer reviewing is often anonymous and non-profitable. What motivates you to do so?
Dr. Dolinay: Manuscript writers appreciate the challenging work of a review. It is a complex task, because it requires a higher level of thinking, critical evaluation of the provided evidence and it is also a creative process. It may challenge your own convictions about a certain topic, which may inspire your own research. It is an honor to be asked to review someone else’s work and it opens a window to a larger science community beyond your own research group. My writing and understanding of science have improved via reviewing manuscripts, which I am grateful for.
(by Lareina Lim, Brad Li)
