Giovanni E. Cacciamani, MD, MSc, FEBU

Abstract

You have accessJournal of UrologyReviewer of the Month1 Feb 2024Giovanni E. Cacciamani, MD, MSc, FEBU Giovanni E. Cacciamani Giovanni E. CacciamaniGiovanni E. Cacciamani USC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California Artificial Intelligence Center, USC Institute of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California Department of Radiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003792AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail Dr Giovanni Cacciamani, a urologist board certified by the EAU (European Association of Urology) and a surgeon-scientist, is an associate professor of urology and radiology research at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles. He is the director of the AI Center for Surgical and Clinical Application in Urology. Dr Cacciamani chairs the EAU's Young Academic Urologist Urotechnology and Digital Healthcare Group. Recognized with the Italian Matula Award for Best Urologist Under 40 in 2021, Dr Cacciamani serves on several boards and has authored more than 300 publications and delivered about 100 lectures on new technological applications in urology. Dr Cacciamani is currently the principal investigator for the development of the PRISMA-AI (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses—Artificial Intelligence Extension), CANGARU (ChatGPT, Generative Artificial Intelligence and Natural Large Language Models for Accountable Reporting and Use), and ICARUS (Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting With Universal Standards) guidelines. WHAT IS YOUR ACADEMIC BACKGROUND/RESEARCH TRAINING? I completed my urology residency at the University of Verona under Dr Walter Artibani and a research fellowship in minimally invasive surgery at the University of Southern California under Dr Inderbir Gill. Both my mentors are giants in the field of urology, and their guidance has been instrumental in my professional development. My research primarily focuses on oncological diseases, patient safety, AI in health care, and minimally invasive surgical treatments for urologic-oncology conditions. Recently, we've delved into AI's potential in urology, leading to the 2021 establishment of a pioneering AI Center in Urology. Our aim is to integrate AI into urological practices to enhance patient care, improve outcomes, and reduce urologists' workload for “making urology human again”! WHY DO YOU REVIEW FOR JU? Collaborating with the JU editorial team during the review process is immensely fulfilling for me. Upholding the duty of reviewing for The Journal of Urology®, I believe, is essential for those committed to academia. In my reviews, I prioritize politeness and respect for fellow scientists' work. My focus is on offering my expertise to constructively improve their work, avoiding the pitfalls of the “Reviewer 2 syndrome” (Reviewer 2 represents a peer reviewer known for being rude, vague, and smug, fixated on certain topics, and not treating authors as equals) to maintain a productive and supportive academic environment. IN YOUR OPINION, WHAT MAKES RESEARCH NOVEL? I believe novelty in research is achieved when it adheres to the highest standards of scientific rigor and accurate data reporting, contributing to advancements in the field. The magnitude of the step forward may vary, sometimes being incremental, but its size is less important than its impact. As part of a united and dynamic scientific community, urology fellows have the opportunity to support and assist each other, fostering collective progress over time. WHAT ARE YOUR TIPS FOR AUTHORS HOPING TO GET PUBLISHED FOR THE FIRST TIME? Authors seeking publication must adhere strictly to each journal's submission requirements, including reporting standards like the EQUATOR (Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of Health Research) Network. Providing a clear, brief, and ethically sound account of all results, favorable or unfavorable, is vital. Success in publishing demands perseverance and patience, as well as staying informed about the latest trends and advancements to keep work current and influential. WHAT SUBJECT MATTER OR RESEARCH QUESTION SHOULD BE STUDIED MORE THOROUGHLY? Both negative and positive outcomes merit being studied. Negative outcomes, such as treatment failures, adverse events and effects, and complications, are fundamental and should be studied more to understand the limits of current practice and to put in place efforts that improve patient care. © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211 Issue 2 February 2024 Page: 326-327 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Giovanni E. Cacciamani USC Institute of Urology and Catherine and Joseph Aresty Department of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California Artificial Intelligence Center, USC Institute of Urology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California Department of Radiology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...

Ähnliche Arbeiten