The Reviewer of the Month for July 2025: Zdenko Sonicki, MD, PhD
Peer review remains a cornerstone of academic publishing, essential for maintaining the quality, reliability, and integrity of scientific work. In recognition of this important process, Biomolecules and Biomedicine journal is proud to highlight the Reviewer of the Month for July 2025—an individual whose exemplary expertise and commitment reflect the highest standards of peer review.
Reviewers are instrumental in guiding authors to improve their manuscripts, offering thorough evaluations and insightful feedback. Their efforts help ensure that published studies are rigorous, relevant, and methodologically sound.
Each month, the BiomolBiomed Editorial Team honors a peer reviewer who has shown remarkable dedication to the review process. This distinction is given to those who consistently provide thoughtful, in-depth, and constructive reviews—assisting authors in refining their work and playing a vital role in scientific progress. Their service embodies the spirit of excellence and collaboration that drives discovery forward.
This month, we are pleased to announce that the Reviewer of the Month Award goes to Prof. Zdenko Sonicki, MD, PhD. Prof. Sonicki is a Tenured Professor at the Department of Medical Statistics, Epidemiology, and Medical Informatics, Andrija Stampar School of Public Health, University of Zagreb, School of Medicine. He is being recognized for his outstanding review. His thoughtful and thorough feedback played a key role in enhancing the clarity, coherence, and scientific rigor of the manuscript under review.
We had the opportunity to speak with Prof. Sonicki about his approach to peer review and his perspectives on the evolving landscape of academic publishing. In our conversation, he discussed his research interests and shared valuable insights into current trends and challenges within his field. Below are some highlights from our discussion:
Interview:1. What inspired you to pursue a career in scientific research, and what motivates you to continue in this profession?
My passion for statistics and data analysis fuels my curiosity and love for continuous learning. Discovering new insights keeps me motivated, and I believe the best way to make a meaningful impact is by excelling in the field I’ve chosen for my career.
2. Which strategies do you use to ensure that your feedback is both fair and useful to the authors? I always strive to give positive yet honest feedback. I make sure to back up my comments with solid arguments, and when needed, I reference relevant literature. During reviews, I emphasize the importance of clear documentation to ensure that the procedure can be both reproduced and replicated. If I notice any gaps in the information, I become cautious and ask the authors to provide additional details, offering suggestions on how they can improve their papers. 3. What steps can be taken to improve the peer-review process to ensure it better aligns with the needs and expectations of today’s researchers? Improving the peer review process is challenging, as it largely depends on the individual reviewer and the effort they put into the review. I’ve encountered reviews that are overly brief, often just a single sentence, and sometimes even offensive without any supporting reasoning. These kinds of reviews are not only disrespectful but also reflect poorly on the reviewer. While you can’t change someone’s personal ethics, you can offer a structured checklist with specific questions and predefined rating scales for reviewers to complete. This would also encourage them to provide reasoning for each rating they give. We are honored to acknowledge Prof. Zdenko Sonicki for his exceptional efforts, which reflect the high level of excellence and dedication that motivates fellow reviewers. His commitment highlights the vital importance of peer review in maintaining the integrity and quality of scientific publications. We urge the academic community to continue supporting and upholding this fundamental aspect of scholarly work.
