Editorials
Peer Review at its Finest THE ultimate goal of The Journal of UrologyÒ is to publish information that helps clinicians advance the science of the discipline of urology to improve care delivered to patients. Many people contribute to this effort but none is more important than reviewers who selflessly devote much time and energy, and whose work benefits all readers of The Journal. Reviewers receive no compensation for their time, are anonymous and ethically are unable to use information they may learn from a manuscript they review until it is published. Yet, the entire premise of peer review is founded upon qualified individuals evaluating submitted manuscripts and objectively providing their opinion. Often, authors revise manuscripts based on the comments of reviewers, making substantial improvements to the final product. At multiple levels, there are increasing pressures and time constraints on physicians in academic and private practice. Yet, individuals from both groups are valuable reviewers for The Journal of Urology. Readers of The Journal may respect the expertise of authors but fail to appreciate the skills required to serve as a useful or, even more, outstanding reviewer. A willing dedication is necessary but not sufficient. Reviewers must truly be experts themselves and understand not only the science and hypotheses behind submitted studies, but also the statistical analyses. Importantly, they must be sufficiently conversant with the published literature on the subject to evaluate the novelty of the work. We are pleased to acknowledge the behind-thescenes experts who are essential to the excellence of The Journal of Urologydour reviewers. As is often the case, designation of some highly deserving individuals inevitably fails to recognize so many others who also contribute in a meaningful manner. Our gratitude and debt are to all of our reviewers but the following are those chosen to have excelled.
0022-5347/15/1936-1877/0 THE JOURNAL OF UROLOGY® © 2015 by AMERICAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION EDUCATION
AND
RESEARCH, INC.
Craig V. Comiter, MDdFemale Urology; Urodynamics/Neurourology Dr. Comiter is Director, Fellowship in Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery; professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, professor in the Department of Urology and Chief, Division of Urology Specialists at Stanford University Medical School in California. He received his medical degree at Harvard Medical School and completed his urology residency at the Harvard Program in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. Comiter has received Honorable Mention and been awarded Best Reviewer twice for The Journal of Urology. Robert J. Hamilton, MD, MPH, FRCSCdOncology (Outcomes) Dr. Hamilton is a urologic oncologist at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto in Canada. He completed his medical school and urology residency at the University of Toronto. During his residency he earned a Masters of Public Health from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and completed a research fellowship at Duke University in North Carolina. Before joining the faculty, he completed a fellowship in urologic oncology at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.03.075 Vol. 193, 1877-1879, June 2015 Printed in U.S.A.
www.jurology.com
j
1877
1878
PEER REVIEW AT ITS FINEST
Jason C. Hedges, MD, PhDdBPH; Infections/ Inflammation; Sexual Function/Infertility Dr. Hedges received his MD at the University of Nevada School of Medicine, completed his urology residency at Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU), and completed a fellowship in erectile dysfunction and male infertility at Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago, Illinois. He currently is assistant professor at OHSU Center for Health & Healing. His current research endeavors focus on erectile dysfunction, male factor infertility and renal transplantation/renal injury. Dr. Hedges was awarded Best Reviewer for 2012. Yukio Homma, MD, PhDdBasic Science Dr. Homma received his medical degree and his PhD at The University of Tokyo, and completed his urology residency at Tokyo Metropolitan Komagome Hospital. Currently he is professor and chair of the Department of Urology at The Graduate School of The University of Tokyo. Dr. Homma just completed his first year serving on the International Editorial Committee of The Journal of Urology. In this role he peer reviewed manuscripts submitted from Tokyo and played an active role in recruiting new reviewers for The Journal. Jonathan C. Routh, MD, MPHdPediatric Urology Dr. Routh is currently assistant professor of Surgery (Urology) and Pediatrics at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina. He received his MD at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and his MPH with a concentration in clinical effectiveness at Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. Routh is a member of the Committee for Science and Publication Guidelines for the National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities
at the CDC. He was awarded Best Reviewer for 2012. Richard A. Santucci, MD, FACS, FC Urol (SA) (Hon)dOncology (Prostate) After receiving his medical degree at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, Dr. Santucci completed his Urology residency at the University of Washington Medical Center in Seattle, Washington, his research fellowship at The Scripps Research Institute at LaJolla, California, and his clinical fellowship in urologic trauma and reconstruction at the University of California, San Francisco. He is currently clinical professor in the Department of Surgical Specialties at Michigan State University. Dr. Santucci was awarded Best Reviewer for 2008 and 2012. Best Reviewers in 2014 Basic Science: Rosalyn M. Adam, Young Deuk Choi, Hikaru Hashitani, Hann-Chorng Kuo, Ernesto Lopez-Corona, Leonardo Oliveira Reis and Roberto Soler BPH; Infections/Inflammation; Urolithiasis; Sexual Function/Infertility: Timothy D. Averch, D. Duane Baldwin, Joshua A. Broghammer, Bradley A. Erickson, Wayne J. G. Hellstrom, Tobias S. Kohler, Alexis E. Te and Henry H. Woo Female Urology; Incontinence; Urodynamics/ Neurourology: Gregory T. Bales, David A. Ginsberg, Melissa Kaufman, Stephanie Kielb, Henry Lai, Arthur P. Mourtzinos, Steven Petrou, William S. Reynolds, John T. Stoffel and Blayne K. Welk Oncology (Outcomes, Benign Diseases of the Kidney): Christopher B. Anderson, Eiji Kikuchi, Hiten D. Patel, Christian P. Pavlovich, Jay D. Raman, Marc C. Smaldone and R. Houston Thompson Oncology (Prostate): Sigrid Carlsson, Paul L. Crispen, Siamak Daneshmand, Ithaar H. Derweesh, Vitaly Margulis, Joel B. Nelson, Alan M. Nieder, John D. Seigne and Angela B. Smith Pediatric Urology: Theodore Barber, Mark P. Cain, Douglas E. Coplen, Nicholas G. Cost, Walid A. Farhat, David B. Joseph and Andrew Stec As important as reviewers are, the essential decisions of The Journal are adjudicated by the editors. Again, readers may fail to appreciate how much effort the editors expend to ensure the
PEER REVIEW AT ITS FINEST
excellence of The Journal. They must truly be highly respected for their expertise but also for their judgment and impartiality. Associate and Section Editors receive and make initial decisions on manuscripts submitted in their area of specialty interest and sometimes triage those that are not of sufficient priority. They must then identify and choose qualified reviewers for manuscripts deemed worthy of full review and make timely decisions once peer review comments are received. Assistant Editors are key in this process and help provide additional perspective and expertise. One thing that may not surprise readers is that experts do not always agree. The collective wisdom of the Associate, Section and Assistant Editors helps ensure appropriate decisions. The Journal is indebted to the following individuals who are completing their terms as Associate and Section Editors. Deborah R. Erickson, MDdAssociate Editor, Female Urology Deb has served as Associate Editor for an area of substantial significance in recent years, female urology. Not only have there been substantial advances, there have also been areas of controversy and contention. The best way to address those things is with dispassionate decision making and advancement of scientific evidence, something at which she has excelled. She has scrupulously avoided promotion of a personal agenda. One thing that always stood out to me about Deb is that she is a good listener. That seems like a simple statement but it actually is profound. Good listeners learn more and can apply that knowledge more appropriately. Deb has exemplified that behavior. Michael L. Ritchey, MDdSection Editor, Pediatric Urology The domain of urology and, in particular, pediatric urology, owes more to Mike Ritchey than gratitude for his work on The Journal of Urology. However, his work as Section Editor responsible for pediatric urology may represent one of his most important contributions. He has been a forceful advocate for pediatric urology but a determined taskmaster in making certain that The Journal of Urology be the repository for
1879
the most important work in the specialty. Mike is widely and deservedly respected for his insightful understanding of clinical and organizational issues in pediatric urology. The Journal of Urology has profited from his insight and effort, and his will be large shoes to fill. Brian R. Matlaga, MD, MPHdAssistant Editor, Stone Disease Dr. Matlaga’s academic investigations of the pathophysiology and epidemiology of stone formation, as well as his contributions to the advancement of minimally invasive surgical techniques are widely respected. As Assistant Editor of The Journal of Urology, Dr. Matlaga exemplified the critical role played by those in the editorial position using clinical context, unmet clinical needs and applicability to care of urology patients as his driving light. This section of The Journal has benefited from his efforts that will not be forgotten. Jodi K. Maranchie, MD, FACSdAssistant Editor, Bladder, Kidney and Testicular Cancer Dr. Maranchie’s contributions were of immense value to The Journal of Urology. Her thoughtful insights and carefully, well worded critiques helped us sort through an increasing deluge of manuscripts. She was consistently fair, very sensitive to the concerns of the authors, and dedicated to ensuring that the review process was efficient and thorough. Her ability to analyze and identify the pearls among the diverse set of articles submitted was amazing. She will certainly be missed on the editorial team. The Journal of Urology is the most widely read, highly cited journal in the specialty. Publication in The Journal is prestigious for authors, and reading the information contained in published articles is of essential value for clinicians and researchers. The process is dependent upon reviewers and editors, and so it is with pride and gratitude that we recognize those deserving individuals who have been invaluable to the success of The Journal. Joseph A. Smith, Jr. Editor-Elect
Peer Review at its Finest THE ultimate goal of The Journal of UrologyÒ is to publish information that helps clinicians advance the science of the discipline of urology to improve care delivered to patients. Many people contribute to this effort but none is more important than reviewers who selflessly devote much time and energy, and whose work benefits all readers of The Journal. Reviewers receive no compensation for their time, are anonymous and ethically are unable to use information they may learn from a manuscript they review until it is published. Yet, the entire premise of peer review is founded upon qualified individuals evaluating submitted manuscripts and objectively providing their opinion. Often, authors revise manuscripts based on the comments of reviewers, making substantial improvements to the final product. At multiple levels, there are increasing pressures and time constraints on physicians in academic and private practice. Yet, individuals from both groups are valuable reviewers for The Journal of Urology. Readers of The Journal may respect the expertise of authors but fail to appreciate the skills required to serve as a useful or, even more, outstanding reviewer. A willing dedication is necessary but not sufficient. Reviewers must truly be experts themselves and understand not only the science and hypotheses behind submitted studies, but also the statistical analyses. Importantly, they must be sufficiently conversant with the published literature on the subject to evaluate the novelty of the work. We are pleased to acknowledge the behind-thescenes experts who are essential to the excellence of The Journal of Urologydour reviewers. As is often the case, designation of some highly deserving individuals inevitably fails to recognize so many others who also contribute in a meaningful manner. Our gratitude and debt are to all of our reviewers but the following are those chosen to have excelled.
0022-5347/15/1936-1877/0 THE JOURNAL OF UROLOGY® © 2015 by AMERICAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION EDUCATION
AND
RESEARCH, INC.
Craig V. Comiter, MDdFemale Urology; Urodynamics/Neurourology Dr. Comiter is Director, Fellowship in Female Pelvic Medicine and Reconstructive Surgery; professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, professor in the Department of Urology and Chief, Division of Urology Specialists at Stanford University Medical School in California. He received his medical degree at Harvard Medical School and completed his urology residency at the Harvard Program in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. Comiter has received Honorable Mention and been awarded Best Reviewer twice for The Journal of Urology. Robert J. Hamilton, MD, MPH, FRCSCdOncology (Outcomes) Dr. Hamilton is a urologic oncologist at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre and the University of Toronto in Canada. He completed his medical school and urology residency at the University of Toronto. During his residency he earned a Masters of Public Health from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and completed a research fellowship at Duke University in North Carolina. Before joining the faculty, he completed a fellowship in urologic oncology at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2015.03.075 Vol. 193, 1877-1879, June 2015 Printed in U.S.A.
www.jurology.com
j
1877
1878
PEER REVIEW AT ITS FINEST
Jason C. Hedges, MD, PhDdBPH; Infections/ Inflammation; Sexual Function/Infertility Dr. Hedges received his MD at the University of Nevada School of Medicine, completed his urology residency at Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU), and completed a fellowship in erectile dysfunction and male infertility at Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago, Illinois. He currently is assistant professor at OHSU Center for Health & Healing. His current research endeavors focus on erectile dysfunction, male factor infertility and renal transplantation/renal injury. Dr. Hedges was awarded Best Reviewer for 2012. Yukio Homma, MD, PhDdBasic Science Dr. Homma received his medical degree and his PhD at The University of Tokyo, and completed his urology residency at Tokyo Metropolitan Komagome Hospital. Currently he is professor and chair of the Department of Urology at The Graduate School of The University of Tokyo. Dr. Homma just completed his first year serving on the International Editorial Committee of The Journal of Urology. In this role he peer reviewed manuscripts submitted from Tokyo and played an active role in recruiting new reviewers for The Journal. Jonathan C. Routh, MD, MPHdPediatric Urology Dr. Routh is currently assistant professor of Surgery (Urology) and Pediatrics at Duke University Medical Center in Durham, North Carolina. He received his MD at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and his MPH with a concentration in clinical effectiveness at Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. Routh is a member of the Committee for Science and Publication Guidelines for the National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities
at the CDC. He was awarded Best Reviewer for 2012. Richard A. Santucci, MD, FACS, FC Urol (SA) (Hon)dOncology (Prostate) After receiving his medical degree at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas, Dr. Santucci completed his Urology residency at the University of Washington Medical Center in Seattle, Washington, his research fellowship at The Scripps Research Institute at LaJolla, California, and his clinical fellowship in urologic trauma and reconstruction at the University of California, San Francisco. He is currently clinical professor in the Department of Surgical Specialties at Michigan State University. Dr. Santucci was awarded Best Reviewer for 2008 and 2012. Best Reviewers in 2014 Basic Science: Rosalyn M. Adam, Young Deuk Choi, Hikaru Hashitani, Hann-Chorng Kuo, Ernesto Lopez-Corona, Leonardo Oliveira Reis and Roberto Soler BPH; Infections/Inflammation; Urolithiasis; Sexual Function/Infertility: Timothy D. Averch, D. Duane Baldwin, Joshua A. Broghammer, Bradley A. Erickson, Wayne J. G. Hellstrom, Tobias S. Kohler, Alexis E. Te and Henry H. Woo Female Urology; Incontinence; Urodynamics/ Neurourology: Gregory T. Bales, David A. Ginsberg, Melissa Kaufman, Stephanie Kielb, Henry Lai, Arthur P. Mourtzinos, Steven Petrou, William S. Reynolds, John T. Stoffel and Blayne K. Welk Oncology (Outcomes, Benign Diseases of the Kidney): Christopher B. Anderson, Eiji Kikuchi, Hiten D. Patel, Christian P. Pavlovich, Jay D. Raman, Marc C. Smaldone and R. Houston Thompson Oncology (Prostate): Sigrid Carlsson, Paul L. Crispen, Siamak Daneshmand, Ithaar H. Derweesh, Vitaly Margulis, Joel B. Nelson, Alan M. Nieder, John D. Seigne and Angela B. Smith Pediatric Urology: Theodore Barber, Mark P. Cain, Douglas E. Coplen, Nicholas G. Cost, Walid A. Farhat, David B. Joseph and Andrew Stec As important as reviewers are, the essential decisions of The Journal are adjudicated by the editors. Again, readers may fail to appreciate how much effort the editors expend to ensure the
PEER REVIEW AT ITS FINEST
excellence of The Journal. They must truly be highly respected for their expertise but also for their judgment and impartiality. Associate and Section Editors receive and make initial decisions on manuscripts submitted in their area of specialty interest and sometimes triage those that are not of sufficient priority. They must then identify and choose qualified reviewers for manuscripts deemed worthy of full review and make timely decisions once peer review comments are received. Assistant Editors are key in this process and help provide additional perspective and expertise. One thing that may not surprise readers is that experts do not always agree. The collective wisdom of the Associate, Section and Assistant Editors helps ensure appropriate decisions. The Journal is indebted to the following individuals who are completing their terms as Associate and Section Editors. Deborah R. Erickson, MDdAssociate Editor, Female Urology Deb has served as Associate Editor for an area of substantial significance in recent years, female urology. Not only have there been substantial advances, there have also been areas of controversy and contention. The best way to address those things is with dispassionate decision making and advancement of scientific evidence, something at which she has excelled. She has scrupulously avoided promotion of a personal agenda. One thing that always stood out to me about Deb is that she is a good listener. That seems like a simple statement but it actually is profound. Good listeners learn more and can apply that knowledge more appropriately. Deb has exemplified that behavior. Michael L. Ritchey, MDdSection Editor, Pediatric Urology The domain of urology and, in particular, pediatric urology, owes more to Mike Ritchey than gratitude for his work on The Journal of Urology. However, his work as Section Editor responsible for pediatric urology may represent one of his most important contributions. He has been a forceful advocate for pediatric urology but a determined taskmaster in making certain that The Journal of Urology be the repository for
1879
the most important work in the specialty. Mike is widely and deservedly respected for his insightful understanding of clinical and organizational issues in pediatric urology. The Journal of Urology has profited from his insight and effort, and his will be large shoes to fill. Brian R. Matlaga, MD, MPHdAssistant Editor, Stone Disease Dr. Matlaga’s academic investigations of the pathophysiology and epidemiology of stone formation, as well as his contributions to the advancement of minimally invasive surgical techniques are widely respected. As Assistant Editor of The Journal of Urology, Dr. Matlaga exemplified the critical role played by those in the editorial position using clinical context, unmet clinical needs and applicability to care of urology patients as his driving light. This section of The Journal has benefited from his efforts that will not be forgotten. Jodi K. Maranchie, MD, FACSdAssistant Editor, Bladder, Kidney and Testicular Cancer Dr. Maranchie’s contributions were of immense value to The Journal of Urology. Her thoughtful insights and carefully, well worded critiques helped us sort through an increasing deluge of manuscripts. She was consistently fair, very sensitive to the concerns of the authors, and dedicated to ensuring that the review process was efficient and thorough. Her ability to analyze and identify the pearls among the diverse set of articles submitted was amazing. She will certainly be missed on the editorial team. The Journal of Urology is the most widely read, highly cited journal in the specialty. Publication in The Journal is prestigious for authors, and reading the information contained in published articles is of essential value for clinicians and researchers. The process is dependent upon reviewers and editors, and so it is with pride and gratitude that we recognize those deserving individuals who have been invaluable to the success of The Journal. Joseph A. Smith, Jr. Editor-Elect
