The Reviewer of the Month for April 2024: Masaru Tanaka, MD, PhD


Peer review is crucial in the scientific publishing process, ensuring research papers meet high standards of quality and accuracy. Moreover, each month, the BiomolBiomed Editorial team recognizes a reviewer who has provided exceptional feedback on the manuscripts they have reviewed.

This month, we are pleased to announce that Masaru Tanaka, MD, PhD, has received the Reviewer of the Month Award. Dr. Masaru Tanaka is a Senior Research Fellow at the HUN-REN-SZTE Neuroscience Research Group, Hungarian Research Network, University of Szeged, Danube Neuroscience Research Laboratory, Hungary. Furthermore, his review was exceptionally high-quality, providing valuable feedback that helped authors enhance the clarity and rigor of their research.

Following this, we sat down with Dr. Tanaka to learn about his peer review approach and his views on the publishing industry. Here are some highlights from our conversation:

Dr. Tanaka, could you please tell us more about your research interests and your thoughts on recent advances or current issues in your field?

Dr. Tanaka: My primary research interests are depression, anxiety, dementia, pain, comorbidities, and translational research on neurological and psychiatric disorders. Notably, current issues in this field include the complexity and heterogeneity of these disorders, the lack of biomarkers, and effective treatments. These disorders place a high burden and cost on individuals and society. Moreover, the ethical and social implications are significant. To address these challenges, we need more interdisciplinary and collaborative research. Additionally, increased public awareness and education are crucial to improving the quality of life for those affected.

How do you manage to balance your time between reviewing manuscripts and your own research projects? What are the most important qualities that a good reviewer should possess?

Dr. Tanaka: Balancing reviewing manuscripts and advancing my own research is a daunting challenge. Interestingly, I see reviewing manuscripts as an essential task for researchers. It enhances their proficiency in manuscript writing and guides the scientific community toward future research. In my opinion, engaging in this pro bono endeavor is a fundamental obligation for researchers.

Could you identify some common mistakes that authors make in their submissions, and how can they be avoided?

Dr. Tanaka: A frequent issue is the inadequate construction of manuscript structures. Specifically, every section should clearly include its fundamental components: overall and specific backgrounds, current issues, and objectives in the introduction. Furthermore, the methods section should detail study design and methodology. Additionally, the results should be contextualized within the broader context. Moreover, the discussion should include arguments, and the conclusion should feature the authors’ thoughtful, comprehensive analyses as experts. Attention to these elements is crucial in manuscript writing.

Finally, we are thrilled to honor Dr. Tanaka as our Reviewer of the Month and are grateful for his contributions to the scientific community. We hope that his example will inspire other reviewers to strive for excellence in their work and will encourage everyone to value the peer review process as an essential part of the scientific publishing ecosystem.