In 2026, mHealth reviewers continue to make outstanding contributions to the peer review process. They demonstrated professional effort and enthusiasm in their reviews and provided comments that genuinely help the authors to enhance their work.

Hereby, we would like to highlight some of our outstanding reviewers, with a brief interview of their thoughts and insights as a reviewer. Allow us to express our heartfelt gratitude for their tremendous effort and valuable contributions to the scientific process.

Lucian M. Feraru, WoundScribe.AI, USA

Lucian M. Feraru

Dr. Lucian M. Feraru is a podiatric surgeon in Los Angeles whose work centers on wound care and limb preservation. He is the Podiatric Residency Research Director at Adventist Health White Memorial and Chief Medical Officer at WoundScribe.AI. His interests include practical, privacy-conscious clinical technologies and helping residents and early-career clinicians develop stronger research and peer review skills. Learn more about him here.

mHealth: Why do we need peer review?

Dr. Feraru: Peer review gives editors another informed look at a paper before publication. A reviewer asks whether the research question is useful and whether the methods are appropriate, then checks that the conclusions follow from the results. This matters because published findings can influence patient care and future studies. A careful review can identify weak claims or overlooked limitations and help authors explain their work more clearly. It is one of the journal’s main quality checks.

mHealth: What do you regard as a healthy peer-review system?

Dr. Feraru: In a healthy system, editors choose reviewers who understand the subject and disclose any conflicts. Reviewers respond on time, explain their concerns clearly, and keep their recommendations proportionate to the problem. Authors should receive comments they can actually use. Clear editorial guidance helps reviewers distinguish essential revisions from matters of preference. Journals should also recognize that a careful review requires skill and time.

mHealth: What do reviewers have to bear in mind while reviewing papers?

Dr. Feraru: Reviewers should start with the research question and whether the study can answer it. Then, they should look closely at the methods, analysis, and conclusions. The conclusions should follow from the evidence, and authors should be clear about limitations that may affect bias or clinical interpretation. Major concerns deserve an explanation of why they matter, while minor edits can be handled separately. Comments should be specific and respectful. Reviewers also need to identify conflicts of interest, privacy concerns, and technology claims that extend beyond the reported validation. Their role is to help the editor reach a fair decision and provide authors with useful guidance.

(by Alan Liu, Brad Li)