Author Interview: Dr Jiao Jiao Li

Event Introduction 

Since its founding in 2016, Bioactive Materials (BAM) has emerged as a leading international platform in materials science and biomedicine. Over the past decade, the journal has achieved remarkable growth, with its impact factor rising from 8.724 (2019) to 20.3 (2024). It has also been listed as a top-tier journal in the Chinese Academy of Sciences Journal Classification (Q1) and the T1 category of the High-Quality Scientific Journal Grading Catalog for materials science for five years (2020–2025). None of this would have been possible without the trust and contributions of our global authors, whose innovative research has shaped BAM’s success. 

To celebrate our 10th anniversary, we launch the **Author Interviews** series, featuring distinguished contributors who have grown alongside BAM—including early-stage submitters, highly cited scholars, and rising scientists. Through their stories, we will explore their journeys with BAM: from the excitement of first submissions to the impact of published research, from upholding research integrity to navigating academic influence, and their visions for the field’s future. These conversations aim to provide practical insights for emerging researchers and express our deepest gratitude to all authors who have been part of our journey. 

Author Interview: Dr Jiao Jiao Li

Dr Jiao Jiao Li FRSN FRSB FIEAust is a Senior Lecturer in Biomedical Engineering at University of Technology Sydney (UTS). Her research in regenerative medicine develops combinational approaches incorporating stem cells, bioactive materials, nanotechnology, and biofabrication to treat chronic diseases, particularly bone and joint disorders.

Here is the interview we did with her:

I. Origins with BAM 

1. What first introduced you to BAM? Do you remember the research topic of your first submission to BAM? What key factors influenced your decision to choose BAM at the time? 

My first interaction with Bioactive Materials was as the co-author of a collaborative study “A low dose cell therapy system for treating osteoarthritis: In vivo study and in vitro mechanistic investigations” published in 2022. At the time, I didn’t know of BAM prior to the submission, but am thankful to my colleagues for making me aware of this journal which over the years has increasingly become a premium outlet for biomaterials-based biomedical research. We were not sure at the time whether our study would be suitable for BAM, because although it did involve biomaterials-based microcarriers, most of the study was about improving the therapeutic potency of stem cells and evaluating their effects in preclinical models of osteoarthritis. We were delighted to know upon acceptance of our article that the more ‘biological’ studies were still of interest to BAM. Having reviewed >10 papers for BAM in the last 3 years, I appreciate that the journal’s readership as well as the articles selected to undergo peer review extend far beyond the biomaterials community, and include a broad definition of ‘bioactive materials’ including biologically-derived matrices and molecules, as well as emerging technologies such as bioimaging and biosensing devices.

2. Among your publications in BAM, which article stands out the most? How has it impacted your academic career? 

Among a number of papers I have authored in BAM, I think the one that was the most memorable was a review paper published in 2023 titled “Multiphasic scaffolds for the repair of osteochondral defects: Outcomes of preclinical studies”. I was quite proud of the content of this review, as it comprehensively captured and analysed all original studies on multiphasic scaffolds for osteochondral tissue regeneration since 2015 until the time of publication, which of course was an enormous amount of work, and shared our critical perspectives on design strategies, challenges, and future outlook of the field. However, what really made this paper special was that it involved ‘generations’ of my students. I moved to University of Technology Sydney (UTS) to start my independent research team in 2020, and due to the effects of COVID, the lab was not really on track until the end of 2022. This review hence marked one of the first papers that came out of ‘my own lab’. I am proud of the students who are co-authors on this paper, whom I had the pleasure of mentoring during their first contact with research in their undergraduate degrees – as intern, Capstone, and Honours students. Inspired by this experience, all three have subsequently started PhD’s, one in my friend’s lab interstate and the other two in my own lab. This review paper is hence extra special because it warms me to think that I have helped the next generation of young researchers become interested in tissue engineering and excel in their careers.

3. As a long-term supporter of BAM, how would you describe the journal’s development over the past decade (e.g., impact factor, review processes, internationalization)? What changes have impressed you the most? 

The journal’s accelerated gain in impact factor is of course extremely impressive and speaks to the broad readership of the journal as well as the quality of published articles. The review process is also highly effective and efficient. What I personally appreciate the most about how the journal has evolved over the past years is how it has embraced the multidisciplinary nature and emerging frontiers of biomedical research, reinforcing its standing as a ‘go-to’ source for the latest advances in the field that does not only include biomaterials-focused research, but also other exciting intersectional research like extracellular vesicles and mimetics, organ-on-chip, and theranostic devices.

II. Submission and Academic Exchange Experiences 

4. Could you share your secrets to success in submitting to BAM? For example, how do you prepare manuscripts that align with the journal’s scope? How do you efficiently respond to reviewer comments? 

I think in the realm of biomaterials and biomedical research with a general purpose of benefitting human health, most research studies are likely to give (in the broad context) incremental rather than groundbreaking advances. But that’s ok – what is important is that the study rationale be well justified, the study design be rigorously undertaken, and the analyses be comprehensively performed and critically discussed. I personally find more value in a manuscript that does not boast the innovation of the specific biomaterial composition, fabrication process, or combination of components they decided to test in their study, but rather they make the study findings relatable and reproducible for other researchers. I appreciate studies that present an optimisation process rather than simply saying ‘we chose this combination/process and it was the best’, because this makes the findings valuable for other researchers and makes a meaningful contribution to the database of knowledge. Adopting a similar approach for responding to reviewer comments, I believe it is important to highlight the core value of the study and the essential analyses contributing to the conclusion. Most reviewer comments can be effectively addressed by demonstrating that the findings of the study are consistent with the conclusions made without overinterpretation, as well as that the findings hold value outside the current study and can meaningfully inform the experimental workflow of other researchers.

5. BAM emphasizes mult-discipline-crossing and clinical translation potential. How do you balance academic innovation with practical application in your research design? 

In biomaterials-related research, innovation itself is perhaps not difficult to achieve, but the challenge lies in developing new but practically useful materials and devices that are scalable, reproducible, and applicable in a variety of settings. Introducing a modified fabrication process or a new molecule in an already established biomaterial system constitutes innovation, but is not necessarily practically useful when considering the translation pipeline. I personally think that an ‘engineering mindset’ should be applied when designing biomaterials-related systems if the intended end outcome includes clinical application, that is, the approach should be as simple and reproducible as possible while ensuring essential function. I believe the direction of innovative ideas should be focused on how to make fabrication systems or material compositions simple and scalable while achieving a balanced set of desirable functions, rather than over-complicating processes and compositions to invent something with little practical relevance or reproducibility.

6. Research integrity is a core principle of BAM. How do you ensure the authenticity and reproducibility of your data in your research? What advice would you give to early-career scholars on this topic? 

I personally believe that whether a study is published in a high-impact journal is not necessarily reflective of the usefulness of the study findings to researchers in the field. A study that comprehensively compares basic fabrication parameters, material combinations, or design factors is not necessarily ‘novel’ and may not be favoured in a high-impact journal. However, if the study is rigorously designed and conducted, and the findings are reproducible, it will provide a lot of useful information for researchers working in the same area and ‘relatable’ findings that could directly influence the way other people design their next study. Regardless of the journal outlet, if a study provides useful information it will be found and cited. There is of course the pressure of publishing in high-impact journals for all researchers, not just early-career scholars, but in the long run it becomes increasingly important to be known as someone who conducts authentic, reproducible, and ‘good’ research. It really pays to start establishing this reputation early in one’s career, and to keep carrying these same values to uphold a positive research culture for younger generations of scholars.

III. Discipline Outlook and Future Aspirations 

7. At the forefront of the materials science and biomedicine intersection, what do you see as the key breakthrough directions for the next decade? How might BAM contribute to these developments? 

I think the key breakthroughs coming up in our field are likely to arise from blurring of disciplinary boundaries, in both product design and in application. A biomaterials-based solution that has real potential for clinical translation will likely need to combine simplicity, reproducibility, and efficacy in the one product, as well as involve materials that can be sustainably and ethically sourced and produced. Biomaterials-based product development will benefit from emerging advances in intersecting fields such as biomanufacturing and AI, as well as integration with living matter or biologics. In the coming years, hopefully we will see news of whole organ (or multi-tissue) replacements that can at least partly relieve the demand for donor organs, organ-on-chips with physiological relevance that can meaningfully reduce the need for animal testing, nanorobots and theranostic devices that combine multiple capabilities in clinical disease diagnosis and treatment, and commercialisable applications of these products and technologies beyond human health – such as cultured meat products, bioremediation, biofuels, and biobatteries.

8. What is the single most important piece of advice you would give to young scholars submitting to BAM for the first time? 

Tell a good story – tell people why your study was designed or done this way, walk people through how the different study components or experiments contribute to the overall story, and why your findings would be useful for the broader community who may not be working in the same area. Also, of course publishing in high-impact journals is important particularly at the start of a research career, but remember that academic success goes far beyond publications on a CV. It’s about the legacy you leave behind as a researcher in driving collaboration, mentoring the next generation, promoting under-represented groups, fostering positive research culture, and being a good ‘citizen’ in science.

9. Please share a one-sentence wish for BAM’s next decade and your expectations for the journal. 

Congratulations and happy 10th birthday to BAM! Thanks for bringing together the bioactive materials community in the last 10 years – look forward to the journal and our community grow even stronger and tread further into the unknown in the next 10 years!