In 2025, many JPHE authors make outstanding contributions to our journal. Their articles published with us have received very well feedback in the field and stimulate a lot of discussions and new insights among the peers.

Hereby, we would like to highlight some of our outstanding authors who have been making immense efforts in their research fields, with a brief interview of their unique perspective and insightful view as authors.

Outstanding Authors (2025)

Jamie-Lee Rahiri, University of Auckland, New Zealand

Meccar Moniem Elino, Ateneo de Manila University, Philippines

Desmond T. Jumbam, Operation Smile, USA

Coral Teresa Andrews, University of Southern California, USA

Matías Irarrázaval, Universidad of Chile, Chile

Jose Rimon II, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, USA

Outstanding Author

Jamie-Lee Rahiri

Dr. Jamie-Lee Rahiri (Ngāti Porou, Ngāti Whātua o Kaipara, Te Ātihaunui-a-Pāpārangi) is a general surgical trainee who completed her PhD investigating equity in access to Bariatric Surgery for Māori in 2020. She established Te Piringa Kōtuku in 2022 to undertake independent Kaupapa Māori surgical and primary health care research alongside her husband, Dr. Jason Tuhoe, who is a general practitioner. She is currently employed as a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Auckland alongside her clinical training role at North Shore Hospital in Auckland, New Zealand. Most importantly, she is Māmā to her three daughters, Nalani, Maiana and Amaya. Follow Dr. Rahiri on LinkedIn and X.

A good academic paper, in Dr. Rahiri’s view, has a clear aim or question and is written simply so that it is easily understood by readers from all backgrounds. Most importantly, it is built on strong ethical foundations and acknowledges the perspectives and data of those who do not represent the majority of their cohort, thereby avoiding harm to those communities. 

We are now in the era of artificial intelligence (AI), and as such, a strong moral and ethical researcher positionality has never been more important. As an academic, Dr. Rahiri uses AI platforms mostly for grammatical purposes but never to refine or direct her research methodology. She believes the most frequently encountered challenges in academic writing stem from a (mis)alignment of researcher integrity and passion with external expectations, which are largely driven by output goals often imposed on researchers as part of their research or clinical training. She adds, “I often hear that research is seen as ‘unenjoyable’ and a ‘chore’, which saddens me as a clinical academic, because research can be a powerful vehicle for transformational change when used responsibly and ethically.”

“I love how I continually grow and develop in my writing, discovering more questions than answers as I progress. Mostly, I am just incredibly humbled to be able to strongly advocate for my whānau, hapū, and iwi in my chosen field of general surgery through research,” says Dr. Rahiri.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Meccar Moniem Elino

Dr. Meccar Moniem Elino is a specialist in Internal Medicine who treats adult ailments clinically and advocates for public health within the community.

Dr. Elino believes that a strong academic paper features a clear research question, an extensive literature review, and a robust methodology, with findings that are thoroughly analyzed and interpreted, including discussions of implications and limitations. It must also demonstrate academic rigor, objectivity, and transparency. Most importantly, as its net outcome, good research contributes meaningfully to the existing body of knowledge, providing insights and implications for future research or practical applications.

In Dr. Elino’s view, researchers should employ a multifaceted approach to avoid bias. In qualitative research, it is essential to use objective language while being aware of potential personal perspectives and experiences. Meanwhile, in quantitative research, they must implement systematic methodologies, such as blind peer review and triangulation of data sources. Overall, they should engage in critical self-reflection, questioning assumptions, and considering diverse viewpoints. Collaborate with peers from varied backgrounds to identify and mitigate biases. By integrating these strategies, researchers can enhance the objectivity and credibility of their work.

At last, Dr. Elino would like to say a few words to encourage other academic writers, "As you pour your heart and mind into advancing scientific progress, remember that your dedication is not merely a pursuit of knowledge, but a beacon of hope for a better future. Your tireless efforts to uncover truths, challenge assumptions, and push boundaries will collectively propel humanity forward, inspiring generations to come. Though the path may be long and winding, the impact of your work will resonate far beyond your own endeavors, shaping the world in profound and lasting ways."

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Desmond T. Jumbam

Dr. Desmond Jumbam is a distinguished professional in global health, dedicated to strengthening health systems across Africa, with particular focus on enhancing access to and the quality of surgical care for vulnerable populations. He possesses substantial experience leading research and policy initiatives at esteemed institutions such as Harvard Medical School, Boston Children's Hospital, and Operation Smile. He has served as the Director of the Health Policy and Advocacy Department, as well as the Global Surgery Advocacy Fellowship at Operation Smile. His scholarly work on global surgery policy has been published in numerous peer-reviewed journals, and he was featured in The Lancet for his efforts in decolonizing global health. He holds an MBA and an MSc in Global Health from the University of Notre Dame, as well as a BA from Taylor University in the United States. Furthermore, he co-hosts the biweekly podcast 'Global Health Unfiltered' alongside colleagues Ella Amoako and Ulrick Sidney Kanmounye. Connect with him on LinkedIn.

JPHE: What are the essential elements of a good academic paper?

Dr. Jumbam: A strong academic paper primarily begins with a clear and relevant research question. This question or hypothesis should address a real gap or pressing global health issue, such as limited access to surgical care or the spread of vaccine misinformation. Next, it must be anchored within existing knowledge, featuring a solid conceptual framework and a clear explanation of its unique contribution. Third, regardless of whether the paper employs quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods, it should have a rigorous methodology suited to answering the research question. Transparency in data and analysis is also vital. In global health, critical reflection and contextual understanding of the research and its findings are crucial. A well-rounded paper recognizes the importance of context, system factors, equity considerations, and potential unintended effects. Ethical considerations and reflexivity are also essential. Finally, a good paper goes beyond just presenting results. It explains the significance of the findings for policy, practice, and advocacy, and outlines future steps or research directions.

JPHE: What are the key skill sets of an author?

Dr. Jumbam: Critical thinking: it is important to be able to question one’s assumptions, analyze systems of power, and understand the context in which research and findings are embedded.
Writing clarity and adaptation: good writers should be able to communicate complex ideas clearly and adapt their tone and language to different audiences while maintaining rigor.
Collaboration & teamwork: since many studies involve multiple countries or institutions, coordinating, communicating, managing authorship, and sharing responsibilities are crucial.
Ethical and equitable practices: ensuring fairness in authorship and representation of voices, especially in global health contexts involving low- and middle-income countries, as well as acknowledging limitations and biases, is vital.
Time management and organization: balancing literature searches, writing drafts, submission, revisions, deadlines, and possibly grant writing or teaching.
Curiosity and humility: being willing to learn, revise understanding, and admit what is not known.

JPHE: Is there any interesting story during academic writing that you would like to share with us?

Dr. Jumbam: My first first-authored research publication came nearly two years after I finished my graduate degree in global health. It was a KAP study on malaria interventions in Zambia, which I completed as my capstone project. Writing my first academic paper was challenging, as it is for many new researchers. The peer-review process was daunting, and my paper was initially rejected by several journals. I felt overwhelmed and considered abandoning the project. What motivated me to continue was my mentor and supervisor, Dr. Nicole Achee at the University of Notre Dame, who consistently encouraged and pushed me forward. She guided me through writing, submitting, revising, and eventually, the paper was published. After this success, I was greatly encouraged, realizing I could overcome a steep learning curve and publish more papers. This experience highlights the importance of having the right mentor when starting out as a researcher. A good mentor helps you take initiative, guides you through the process, and supports you when you feel like giving up.

(by Sasa Zhu, Brad Li)

Coral Teresa Andrews

Coral Teresa Andrews is an Adjunct Faculty Instructor at the University of Southern California, Sol Price School of Public Policy and Executive Consultant. She holds a Doctor of Policy, Planning, and Development degree from the University of Southern California (2021), a Master of Business Administration from New Hampshire College (1989), and a Bachelor of Science in Nursing from the University of South Alabama (1983). She is a Fellow of the American College of Healthcare Executives and a licensed Registered Nurse.Her career spans executive roles in the public, private, and plural sectors. Her work as a senior officer in the military culminated with joint service working alongside global partners in international relations and diplomacy. She has served at the forefront of domestic health policy design, implementation, and led a start-up corporation. With dynamic changes occurring across global health, she is excited to position herself as a thought leader in this space. Follow her on LinkedIn.

JPHE: What role does academic writing play in science?

Dr. Andrews: Academic writing serves as a building block in the overall field of scientific research. My area of practice is social sciences. Black swan events happen on a somewhat frequent basis these days: from a global pandemic to a complete disruption of the global health architecture as we know it. Each of these occurring within a span of 5 years. For science and practice to evolve, leaders rely on a collective body of research to inform new insights. Academic writing is one source that contributes meaningfully to the practice and affords leaders the opportunity to keep a finger on the pulse of change.

JPHE: How to ensure one’s writing is critical?

Dr. Andrews: The first step to ensuring the value of one’s writing is to do a thorough review of literature. Consider critically which gaps you are seeking to fill. Reflect upon the “why” to assess the value of your individual contribution to a topic or area of practice. As to the writing process, strive for a peer-reviewed journal opportunity. This process contrasts to other writing styles (ex. Op-ed) and will force you to answer the difficult questions that are necessary to shape your writing into a critically relevant piece.

JPHE: Why is it important for a researcher to apply for institutional review board (IRB) approval?

Dr. Andrews: When embarking on human subject research, application for Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval is an essential step. In my own doctoral dissertation research, I embarked on historical research which would have likely led to an ‘exempt status’. This status means that there is an unlikely risk of harm to the participants. However, the only certainty of this assumption was to pursue the IRB application process. As a researcher, I found the IRB process to be instructional and contemplative. It led to deeper thinking about the obligations I had to protect the oral stories of those I interviewed. Omission, in my circumstances, would have resulted in the potential for human subjects’ risk in my own research. As a researcher who desired an opportunity to publish my research, having the IRB determination allowed me to complete a critical step in the journal article submission and approval process.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Matias Irarrázaval

Dr. Matías Irarrázaval is a child and adolescent psychiatrist and Regional Advisor for Mental Health and Substance Use at the Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization. He is an Associate Professor of Psychiatry at Universidad de Chile and researcher at the Center for the Well-being and Development of Adolescence and Children in the Digital Age (BAND). Previously, he served as Director of Mental Health at Chile's Ministry of Health (2017-2020). His research focuses on mental health systems governance, policy implementation, and reducing access disparities across Latin America. He bridges rigorous academic methodology with practical policy application, working closely with ministries of health throughout the region to evaluate and advance mental health reforms and systems transformation. Current projects include comparative analyses of mental health governance frameworks across Latin American countries, adaptation of evidence-based interventions for primary healthcare settings, and evaluation of community-based service implementation. His work emphasizes translating research evidence into culturally adapted, sustainable interventions for resource-constrained health systems. Follow him on LinkedIn and X.

JPHE: What are the key skill sets of an author?

Dr. Irarrázaval: The most essential skill is serving as a bridge—translating methodological rigor into actionable insights that can change lives. When I write, I constantly ask: will this help policymakers understand what to do differently? Scientific precision matters enormously, but if your work sits in a journal without influencing practice, you've missed the point. Second is comparative thinking. Working across Latin America, I've learned that context is everything. The same mental health intervention that works in an urban capital might fail in a rural setting, not because the evidence is wrong, but because the implementation context differs fundamentally. Good authors help readers understand why something happened and where else those lessons might apply. Finally, intellectual honesty pairs with strategic communication. Our comparative governance study found that some countries with impressive policy documents achieved little in practice, while others with less sophisticated policies made real progress. That's uncomfortable when you're working with the very governments you're evaluating. But we must report what the data show, not what's politically convenient. The skill is doing that in ways that open doors for improvement rather than simply criticizing.

JPHE: How to avoid biases in one's writing?

Dr. Irarrázaval: Bias avoidance requires constant vigilance when studying systems we care about are improving. Three practices are essential. First, make your assumptions explicit before analyzing data. When we design our governance study, I believe systematic implementation approaches would outperform fragmented ones. So, we specify our evaluation criteria in advance. This forces you to confront whether data support or contradict your expectations. When one country shows minimal service development despite establishing hundreds of community mental health centers, documenting that gap is uncomfortable but necessary. Second, triangulate across multiple sources. Policy documents show what governments claim; international databases show what's measurable; neither shows what's actually happening on the ground. We combine these specifically to catch inconsistencies. One country's community mental health network looks impressive in policy documents, but examining actual implementation reveals the specific financing and reporting structures that make it function. Third, collaborate with colleagues who challenge your interpretations. Working with researchers across Latin America and Europe means someone is always questioning assumptions. When comparing mental health systems across seven countries, no single researcher understands all the political, economic, and cultural nuances.

JPHE: Academic writing takes a lot of time and effort. What motivates you to do so?

Dr. Irarrázaval: I think about countries that establish hundreds of community mental health centers—impressive numbers until you realize they have the region's lowest mental health spending and vast gaps between urban and rural access. Those numbers represent real people needing care, and the gap between what exists on paper and what's actually accessible is one academic writing can help close. My motivation comes from knowing rigorous analysis changes what's possible. When we demonstrate that governance mechanisms—how countries actually implement policies—explain most of the differences in equitable mental health services, we give policymakers evidence that implementation matters as much as money. That's hopeful. Countries don't have to wait until they're wealthy to make progress. Consulting on a pilot study adapting brief psychological interventions for primary care, I saw frontline health workers struggling to deliver evidence-based treatments while facing productivity requirements that conflicted with what the research prescribed. That tension between scientific rigor and operational reality requires careful adaptation work—research that only gets done when people invest the time. Regional mental health reform commitments were made over three decades ago. Academic writing creates the institutional memory that lets us learn what's worked and what hasn't across different contexts, accelerating progress and avoiding repeated mistakes.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Jose Rimon II

Jose Rimon II is acknowledged worldwide as a visionary and global leader in reproductive health and in advancing health equity. He is currently Emeritus Senior Scientist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. He was the Founding Director in 2023 of the William H. Gates Sr. Institute for Population and Reproductive Health and, prior to that, was the Director of the Bill & Melinda Gates Institute for ten years. He served as the Chair of the International Steering Committee and the Core Organizing Group of the largest scientific conference and platform on reproductive health in the world—the biennial International Conference on Family Planning (ICFP) attended by 3,000-5,000 delegates from more than 120 countries worldwide. His research and practice interests focus on health equity, scale, program impact measurement, sustainability and demographic futures. He is a co-author of three books and has published in many peer journals on issues related to public health.

JPHE: What are the most commonly encountered difficulties in academic writing?

Dr. Rimon II: Time and reflection. Data can be generated or made available but time constraints are constants. Reflections before, during and after are must-haves, otherwise you are just in the business of writing for writing’s sake, which to me, is not the primary purpose of publishing.

JPHE: The burden of being a scientist/doctor is heavy. How do you allocate time to write papers?

Dr. Rimon II: The key question is how strong one’s motivation is in regard to the potential contributions of the article to the field of public health. If one is convinced it has to be written and shared with the world, then time will just have to be allocated.

JPHE: What is fascinating about academic writing?

Dr. Rimon II: I don’t find academic writing that fascinating. It is hard work in which one has to follow certain prescribed parameters. However, if the findings are reduced to easily digestible insights or knowledge along the lines of how Malcolm Gladwell does it, then it becomes fascinating to me.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)