academic medicine, success is often measured by publication metrics—citation counts, impact factors, and H-indices— rather than by meaningful improvements in patient outcomes. This opinion article critiques the current publishing paradigm, highlighting the disconnection between scholarly productivity and real-world impact. It emphasizes how excessive emphasis on methodological rigidity and elitist academic standards marginalizes clinically relevant, life-saving interventions, particularly those that are low-cost and community-centred. A compelling example is provided through the experience of Prof. Dasaad Mulijono (DM), who successfully saved 3,500 elderly COVID-19 patients with multiple comorbidities during the pandemic using a simple and effective plant-based dietary intervention. Despite these remarkable outcomes, the intervention was rejected for publication by a high-impact journal, not due to scientific inadequacies, but because it lacked a randomized design. This paper also examines how high article processing charges (APCs) perpetuate systemic inequities in the dissemination of knowledge. Drawing on historical and ethical insights, including teachings from Jesus Christ, it advocates for a rehumanized, impact-oriented research evaluation model. The article concludes by proposing the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) into peer-review processes, aiming to objectively prioritize translational impact and equitable access over prestige and profit.
Dasaad Mulijono (Mon,) studied this question.