In 2025, ALES 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.
Yuki Kobari, Tokyo Women’s Medical University, Japan
Takanobu Utsumi, Toho University Sakura Medical Center, Japan
Yuki Kobari
Yuki Kobari serves as an Assistant Professor and Medical Director in the Department of Urology at Tokyo Women’s Medical University in Tokyo, Japan. With a rich array of certifications from the Japanese Urological Association, including those as a specialist and instructor, along with certifications in cancer treatment, transplantation medicine, laparoscopic surgery, robotic surgery instruction, and anti-aging medicine, he is a highly qualified professional. Having earned a PhD in Medicine from Tokyo Women’s Medical University, he specializes in robotic-assisted urologic surgery and is actively engaged in multiple clinical research projects centered around urologic malignancies. The overarching goal of his clinical and academic work is to drive the advancement of surgical techniques and enhance the outcomes for patients suffering from urologic cancers.
According to Dr. Kobari, peer review is an essential and foundational part of the scientific process. It plays a crucial role in safeguarding the integrity, accuracy, and credibility of scholarly work. By having experts in the same field scrutinize research, it functions as a quality-control measure. These reviewers assess various aspects such as the validity of the methodology employed, the relevance of the research findings, and the soundness of the conclusions drawn. Through this process, potential flaws, biases, or ethical issues can be identified before the research is published, thus ensuring that high scientific standards are maintained. Moreover, peer review promotes transparency and accountability within the scientific community. It also fosters an environment of continual improvement in research. The constructive dialogue that it encourages among researchers can lead to the development of stronger and more impactful studies, as well as the emergence of new innovations. In the absence of peer review, the academic community and the public would be deprived of a vital safeguard against the spread of misinformation and the dissemination of low-quality scientific work.
Dr. Kobari acknowledges that although the peer-review system is necessary, it has several limitations. The process can be time-consuming, and the quality of reviews may lack consistency, being influenced by the individual expertise of the reviewers. There is also a risk that innovative research may be unjustly rejected. Additionally, reviewers often do not receive adequate recognition for their significant contributions. To address these issues and enhance the peer-review system, several measures can be taken. Implementing clearer review guidelines would help standardize the process and ensure more consistent evaluations. Promoting double-blind or open review models can help reduce bias in the review process. Utilizing AI tools for initial checks can streamline the process and potentially catch some basic errors or issues more efficiently. Furthermore, providing academic credit or formal acknowledgment to reviewers can serve as an incentive, encouraging them to conduct better and more timely reviews, thereby improving the overall quality of the peer-review system.
“To all fellow reviewers, I sincerely thank you for your dedication and unseen efforts. Your commitment plays a vital role in maintaining the quality and credibility of scientific research. Even though your work is often behind the scenes, it has a lasting impact on the progress of science and patient care. Please take pride in the knowledge that your contributions truly matter. Let us continue to support each other and uphold the integrity of our field together,” says Dr. Kobari.
(by Lareina Lim, Brad Li)
Takanobu Utsumi
Dr. Takanobu Utsumi is an Associate Professor of Urology and Director of the Clinical Genetics Center at Toho University Sakura Medical Center in Japan. His clinical and research interests focus on urologic oncology, particularly prostate and bladder cancer, and adrenal tumors. He is also experienced in the clinical management of hereditary cancer syndromes, integrating genetic insights into patient care. Dr. Utsumi is actively involved in translational research aimed at bridging molecular profiling with clinical decision-making. His recent projects include developing novel therapeutic strategies combining targeted therapy and immunotherapy for FGFR3-mutant bladder cancer, and constructing nomogram-based risk stratification tools for prostate cancer. In the field of adrenal tumors, he engages in multidisciplinary approaches to optimize diagnosis and treatment outcomes. Dr. Utsumi has authored numerous peer-reviewed publications and serves as a dedicated reviewer for many international journals, contributing to the advancement of minimally invasive and oncologic urology. Learn more about him here.
ALES: What do you regard as a healthy peer-review system?
Dr. Utsumi: A healthy peer-review system ensures fair, timely, and constructive evaluations of submitted manuscripts. It encourages transparency, promotes scientific integrity, and fosters collaboration between authors, reviewers, and editors. A balanced system values both critical appraisal and respectful communication, creating a platform where authors can improve their work based on meaningful feedback. Diversity in reviewer backgrounds and expertise also strengthens the system by offering comprehensive perspectives.
ALES: What do you consider as an objective review? How do you make sure your review is objective?
Dr. Utsumi: An objective review focuses solely on the scientific merit, methodological soundness, and relevance of the study, irrespective of the authors’ affiliations, nationality, or prior publications. To maintain objectivity, I begin by carefully reading the manuscript multiple times and making notes based on evidence. I avoid personal biases by comparing the findings with current literature and established guidelines, and I strive to offer clear, evidence-based suggestions rather than subjective opinions.
ALES: Data sharing is prevalent in scientific writing in recent years. Do you think it is crucial for authors to share their research data?
Dr. Utsumi: Yes, I believe data sharing is essential for advancing science. It enables reproducibility, transparency, and collaboration opportunities that can lead to new discoveries. Sharing data also allows others to validate findings, identify errors, and reuse datasets for meta-analyses or secondary research, thereby maximizing the value of scientific investments. When ethical and privacy concerns are addressed properly, open data practices enhance the credibility and impact of research.
(by Lareina Lim, Brad Li)
