In 2025, many JHMHP 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)

Steven S. Coughlin, Augusta University, USA

Arul Earnest, Monash University, Australia

Outstanding Author

Steven S. Coughlin

Steven S. Coughlin, PhD, is a Professor of Epidemiology at Augusta University in Augusta, Georgia, USA. He has a broad background in public health and clinical research. As a faculty member at Georgetown University, he participated in the planning and conduct of community-based behavioral intervention research involving African American residents of the District of Columbia. While being a faculty member at Tulane University, Dr. Coughlin planned and conducted community-based research on the early detection of breast and cervical cancer in diverse communities in rural southern Louisiana. During the eleven years that he was a senior epidemiologist at the CDC in Atlanta, he participated in numerous collaborative studies on cancer of the breast, cervix, colon, and ovary. While being a senior epidemiologist at the VA Office of Public Health in Washington, DC, he was principal investigator of the Follow-up Study of a National Cohort of Gulf War and Gulf War Veterans (n=30,000 men and women) and coinvestigator of the National Health Study for a New Generation of US Veterans (n=60,000). In his current position at Augusta University, Dr. Coughlin was coinvestigator of Cancer Health Awareness through screeNinG and Education (CHANGE) for Public Housing Residents and a coinvestigator of Obesity-related Disparities in the Bidirectional Risk of Cardiovascular disease and Cancer. Learn more about him here.

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

Dr. Coughlin: Academic writing involves drafting a well-structured manuscript that is free of spelling and grammar errors. With academic writing, manuscripts are structured in a way that enables peers and collaborators to quickly assimilate the information. When I teach graduate students how to prepare a journal article, I discuss the organization of manuscripts (title page, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, references, tables, and figures). I also provide tips for how to devote time to writing.  For example, it can be helpful to block out time on your calendar for writing activities and to get away from e-mail or other distractions. In addition, authors must review the literature by performing bibliographic searches and summarize what is already known about a topic and what the gaps in the literature are.

However, I believe that the most important skill for academic writing is creativity and the ability to come up with a good idea to write about. I find that reviewing new articles published in key journals is helpful for formulating new writing ideas. I also review conference proceedings and survey questionnaires (for example, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey questionnaires) and think about research questions that can be examined using available data. The most successful articles test new research hypotheses and help to fill in the scientific evidence base about the causes of health and disease and possible preventive measures. In this way, creativity goes hand-in-hand with originality, and the best articles advance our understanding of a scientific topic and find new solutions to a problem.

JHMHP: How to avoid biases in one’s writing?

Dr. Coughlin: Bias in scientific writing, including systematic errors that skew the results, interpretation, or presentation of research findings, can occur at various stages of the research process, from study design and data collection to analysis and publication. In order to minimize such problems, I disclose potential conflicts of interest such as sources of research funding. In addition, I specify research questions and hypotheses in advance, prior to analyzing the data. One of the potential problems in scientific writing is that authors tend to publish positive research findings, which can lead to the exclusion of studies with small sample sizes or negative results. This can lead to systematic bias in literature reviews and meta-analyses. To avoid such problems, we strive to publish studies regardless of whether the findings are positive or negative.

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

Dr. Coughlin: I spend a lot of time writing study proposals that include information about the significance of the proposed research, its originality or novelty, and the methods that will be employed. Although many proposals are not funded, the information that goes into the background and significance section of the proposal can often be edited and expanded into a review article or commentary. In this way, scientific writing completed as part of research proposals can lead to new publications on important health topics.

Part of my motivation from publishing journal articles and books is the pleasure of knowing that my creative works have been found to be useful by others. I authored Case Studies in Public Health Ethics, which was published by the American Public Health Association. It has been a popular textbook in graduate courses. One student told me that after she read my book she decided to pursue a career in public health. I periodically check Google Scholar to see how many of my publications have been referenced in other works. For example, my article on Recall Bias in Epidemiologic Studies, which was published by the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, has been referenced by other authors for more than 1,569 times.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)

Arul Earnest

Prof. Arul Earnest is the deputy head of the Clinical Outcomes data Reporting and Research Program (CORRP) and the Biostatistics Unit in the School of Public Health & Preventive Medicine at Monash University, Australia. He has authored a textbook, three book chapters, over 250 publications in peer-reviewed international journals and attracted grant funding with a total value of ~A$22million. His research is globally recognized, with engagements like the International Society of Bayesian Analysis Conference and the World Congress of Epidemiology. He leads a data science team of 4 data analysts and 7 PhD students, with a research focus on Bayesian spatio-temporal models and machine learning techniques, showcasing his commitment to advancing healthcare methodologies in the area of big data and clinical registries. Follow Prof. Earnest on LinkedIn, Google Scholar and his homepage.

A good academic paper, according to Prof. Earnest, is one that has a clear hypothesis and answers an important question using a clear, well-structured approach. It should be based on solid research, explain the background of the topic, and use reliable methods to analyze data. The findings should be presented in a logical way, with strong evidence to support them. To him, a great paper does not just share results—it also explains why they matter and how they can be applied in real life, whether in research, healthcare, or policy-making. He tries to keep his papers focused along these lines, whether it is to help policy-makers identify geographical regions with excessive high risk of disease mortality or to partner regulators in identifying problematic breast implants using an early warning statistical tool.

One of the biggest challenges in academic writing Prof. Earnest finds is making complex ideas easy to understand while still keeping the scientific details accurate. He believes this is especially true in the field of Biostatistics. Researchers need to explain their work in a way that both experts and non-experts can follow. It can also be tough to structure a paper so that it flows smoothly from one section to the next, especially when dealing with lots of data and technical concepts. Another challenge is responding to feedback from reviewers, which requires careful revisions without losing the original message of the research. Despite these difficulties, he finds academic writing exciting because it allows researchers to share new knowledge, challenge existing ideas, and contribute to meaningful progress in their fields, while at the same time ensuring rigor in research through independent peer review.

“Academic writing is fascinating because it allows researchers to contribute new knowledge that can have a real impact on science, healthcare, and society. It is a way to share discoveries, challenge existing ideas, and push the boundaries of what we know. There is a certain structured flow to academic writing (e.g. background, methods, results, conclusions, discussion) and there are also excellent flowcharts (e.g. STROBE and CONSORT statements) which allow for consistency, so that others can easily follow and understand the described research,” says Prof. Earnest.

(by Brad Li, Masaki Lo)