In 2017, we began recognizing reviewers who have distinguished themselves by consistently providing insightful, detailed, and valuable input to our authors and our editorial team. We continue the tradition this year by inducting five remarkable reviewers into the AJKD Reviewer Hall of Fame. The editors thank and congratulate these reviewers, all of whom shared why they participate in the peer review process below:

Rasheeda K. Hall, MD @Rasheeda_HallMD
Duke University

“Peer review is an essential part of research. Whether we like it or not, reviewer feedback shows our blind spots and improves the quality of the science and its reporting. Peer review improves how I appraise the literature by seeing other reviewer comments and how I prepare and edit my own manuscripts.”

Kenneth Lim, MD @Ken_Lim001 
Indiana University

“I find the process of peer review that combines thoughtfulness, helpful suggestions, and ensuring the highest standard for scientific rigor, trust and integrity to be at the heart of research. It is always an honor and an opportunity to make a meaningful contribution to the scientific advancement of our field.”

Meghan E. Sise, MD @megsise
Massachusetts General Hospital
Harvard Medical School

“Reviewing papers for our major renal journals is one of  the most important contributions we can make to our field; it so essential that we keep an extremely strong peer-review process to ensure we maintain  the trust of the in the scientific publishing process. I know reviewing papers strengthens my own research and writing; I get to see some of the newest ideas in nephrology and I always learn from reading new methodologies and approaches.”

Carl P. Walther, MD
Baylor College of Medicine

“I find providing peer review to be a very satisfying and meaningful activity. It is great to take a deep dive into a manuscript, and I learn something new every time I review. It is often inspiring to see what other researchers are doing and how they are doing it. As an author, I appreciate the effort that peer reviewers provide in critically reviewing my manuscripts, and I try hard to repay the service to the medical research community at large by providing constructive, accurate, objective, and timely review of manuscripts. Effective, efficient peer review is critical to the scientific process, and to expanding knowledge in clinical science.”

James B. Wetmore, MD
Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute

“Peer review is the process by which the scientific community brings light to discoveries. Peer review is the one indispensable tool through which we debate, critique, and challenge ourselves in the quest to deliver the highest quality research findings to the scientific community and to society at large.”

Congratulations again to these reviewers! The full list of reviewers in the AJKD Reviewer Hall of Fame is available here.