In 2026, 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 (2026)
Chung-Han Hsieh, Coast Guard Administration, Taiwan
Outstanding Author
Chung-Han Hsieh
Chung-Han Hsieh, DHSc, is affiliated with the Coast Guard Administration, Taiwan, where his work involves developing and revising policies related to maritime and coastal emergency care. He received his Doctor of Health Science degree from Kyoto Tachibana University, Japan. His research interests lie at the intersection of maritime and coastal emergency care, prehospital emergency medical services, epidemiology, and biostatistics. Drawing on his background in maritime safety and emergency response, he focuses on how evidence from patients rescued in maritime and coastal settings can inform better systems, policies, and field practices. His recent work examines the characteristics of emergency cases occurring at sea and along the coast, including patient profiles, mechanisms of injury or illness, rescue patterns, response time, and factors that may delay access to definitive care. Through his research, he aims to help shorten rescue time, improve coordination between maritime/coastal rescue and medical systems, and strengthen evidence-based emergency preparedness across land and sea. Follow him on LinkedIn and ResearchGate.
JPHE: What are the key skill sets of an author?
Dr. Hsieh: Academic writing is not simply the act of presenting results. It begins with recognizing important questions in real-world practice, especially those that may be overlooked because they fall between disciplines, professions, or administrative boundaries. A good author should identify such problems, examine them with appropriate methods, and translate complex findings into knowledge that can be understood and used by clinicians, emergency medical personnel, public health professionals, policymakers, and field practitioners.
Adaptability is also essential. After recognizing a problem, an author may need to enter fields that are necessary but initially unfamiliar. In my own experience, questions arising from maritime and emergency care practice led me to engage more deeply with public health, epidemiology, biostatistics, and analytical software. This was not always comfortable, but it was necessary. When facing obstacles, authors should not be constrained by familiar knowledge or conventional frameworks. They must be willing to acquire new skills, consult other disciplines, and use appropriate tools to overcome limitations.
Finally, authors need intellectual honesty. Evidence does not always support what we expect. A good author should avoid overstating conclusions, acknowledge limitations, and present findings in a way that is both scientifically cautious and socially useful.
JPHE: How to avoid biases in one’s writing?
Dr. Hsieh: Avoiding bias begins with recognizing that every author has prior experience, values, and expectations. These backgrounds may help us identify important questions, but they may also shape how we interpret evidence. Therefore, academic writing should not be used to defend original assumptions or institutional standpoints. Authors should allow evidence to guide the argument, even when findings are more complex or less convenient than expected.
In quantitative research, this attitude should be reflected throughout the research process, from study design and variable definition to data cleaning, statistical analysis, interpretation, and wording. Authors should define research questions clearly, select appropriate methods, acknowledge limitations, and avoid language that implies stronger conclusions than the data can support. This is especially important in observational studies, where confounding, selection bias, and omitted variables cannot be fully eliminated.
I also believe that authors should not limit themselves to methods commonly used in their own discipline. Learning from different fields such as economics and policy evaluation can provide useful approaches for assessing unobserved factors. Sensitivity analysis for unmeasured or unobserved confounding helps examine robustness and discuss uncertainty more responsibly. Thus, avoiding bias is a continuous discipline of skepticism, learning, precision, humility, and transparency.
JPHE: Academic writing takes a lot of time and effort. What motivates you to do so?
Dr. Hsieh: What motivates me most is the possibility that research can support real-world decision-making and improve existing systems. Academic writing takes time, but it allows practical problems to be examined through evidence rather than impressions, assumptions, or administrative convenience. In fields such as emergency medical services and maritime safety, this matters because system-level decisions may directly influence rescue time, patient outcomes, and the safety of frontline personnel.
Academic writing also helps reveal limitations that may remain invisible in daily practice. Some problems are not caused by a single individual or institution, but by gaps between systems, disciplines, or responsibilities. Research provides a way to describe these gaps clearly and discuss how they may be improved. In this sense, writing is not only a process of reporting findings, but also a way to create a common language for change.
Another motivation is to serve as a bridge between fields. My interests connect maritime operations, prehospital emergency care, public health, epidemiology, and policy. Academic writing allows me to translate field experience into scientific evidence, and evidence back into practical implications. If research helps professionals understand one another and make better decisions together, the effort is worthwhile.
(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)