We are delighted to announce that we had the opportunity to interview Dr. Joaquim Carreras, a winner of the Biomedicines 2023 Outstanding Reviewer Award. Join us as we delve into his experiences as a reviewer and his insights into collaborating with Biomedicines.

Name: Dr. Joaquim Carreras
Affiliation: Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, School of Medicine, Tokai University, Tokyo, Japan
Research Interests: artificial intelligence; molecular histopathology; pathology; neoplasia; inflammatory diseases; biomarkers; immune checkpoints; immuno-oncology; health care informatics; diagnosis and treatment

The following is an interview with Dr. Joaquim Carreras:

1. Can you please tell us a little more about yourself and your current research?
I am a pathologist with a medical degree from the University of Barcelona, Spain. My medical specialization focused on pathology. I completed residency training in pathology at the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, Spanish Ministry of Health. My Ph.D. was in hematopathology from the Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Barcelona. I worked as a pathologist in Spain, as a medical research associate at the University of Cambridge (UK), and at the Biomedical Research Institute of the National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST) Tsukuba Central (Japan). I am currently at Tokai University, School of Medicine. My fields of research are immuno-oncology, inflammatory diseases, and molecular pathology. I focus on hematological neoplasia (lymphoma) and molecular histopathology studies. As a pathologist, I have always been interested in digital image analysis and, in the past years, in the application of AI in the medical field.

2. Can you please share with us your thoughts upon winning the award?
It was unexpected. It made me happy because the work of the reviewers is voluntary but necessary in science. Science needs peer review to be more reliable and trustworthy. This work is done by academics who volunteer, as not all academics perform peer review. I must note that, when I received the award, I was preparing for a meeting, so I didn’t have much time to enjoy. However, I am grateful to MDPI for the award because sometimes the work of reviewers is taken for granted (and it has a cost in terms of invested time).

3. In your opinion, what are some of the qualities necessary for being a reviewer?
The most important thing is to keep an open mind, be constructive in the feedback, and be aware of your capabilities. You must avoid conflicts of interest with the authors; this can be difficult. When searching for reviewers, the editors of the journals may search for other researchers who have published similar studies in recent years. However, the risk is that the reviewers will be competitors, and the review will be biased by this fact. This is why I think reviewers should have some knowledge in the field of the article, but not too much. It is interesting that lately, in the MDPI review form, you are asked to confirm that you have not used AI (e.g., generative AI) to perform the review. We are in challenging times as some researchers have taken advantage of AI to create papers. Previously, I had never thought you could use AI during the review process. A turning point in AI has been the release of OpenAI’s ChatGPT, which is a trained conversational model. It is important to point out that thinking and making our own decisions are what makes us human. Letting machines think for us makes us less free and less conscious. Therefore, no machine should be made in the likeness of the human mind.

4. Can you share some highlights of your experience as a reviewer for Biomedicines, and how it has enriched your understanding of the latest advancements in biomedicine?
Some articles are quite multidisciplinary, and you may find that you are not an expert in all types of experiments and analyses that are shown in the article. This can be challenging. However, by revising the papers, you can update your knowledge and learn. The medical field can be conservative sometimes, and journals that accept the most innovative research are necessary.

5. As someone deeply involved in the peer-review process at Biomedicines, how do you perceive the journal's impact on shaping the future direction of research and innovation in the field of biomedicine?
This journal is multidisciplinary, and there are many mechanistic studies. Therefore, in my view, Biomedicines lies between human pathology and drug development. The journal addresses the challenges in bringing biological agents or novel targeted strategies to clinical practice. Therefore, it focuses on laboratory medicine research, translational medical research, and comprehensive preclinical studies.