[VIDEO] EASE Peer Review Week discussion panel
Catch up on a range of topics related to peer review by watching this panel discussion webinar hosted by EASE.
Open Reviewer Toolkit available
Find out how to review a research manuscript using the Open Reviewer Toolkit.
Are Registered Reports living up to expectations?
Find out how research published in Registered Reports compares to that in standard articles – is it really higher quality?
Will preprint articles replace publication in traditional peer-reviewed journals?
The suggestion that preprints could replace traditional journals has been debated. Dr Haseeb Irfanullah provides arguments against this view.
Should we pay peer reviewers?
Join the debate: learn about the potential benefits and risks of paying peer reviewers.
Is there gender bias in the peer review system?
The gender gap in publications is well documented, but does peer review contribute to this bias? A recent study investigated.
Will machines replace peer reviewers? The role of artificial intelligence in scientific publishing
Machine learning could help tackle an increase in manuscript submissions and speed up peer review, but the ethical implications must be considered.
Is the quality of scientific reporting in preprints up to the peer review standard?
Find out if preprints are up to scratch when it comes to transparent reporting and whether traditional peer review can raise the bar higher.
Is it ever ok for editors to alter peer review reports?
A recent survey assessed the prevalence of editors altering peer review reports. Read about the results here.
Medical research without adequate pre-publication review could damage public trust in medical science
Recommendations from 3 leading medical communication organisations aim to protect the integrity of published scientific and medical research.
Research integrity in the COVID-19 era: insights from Retraction Watch co-founder Ivan Oransky
Read Ivan Oransky’s take on the retraction landscape and his perspectives on how to tackle research integrity issues in the future.
What motivates researchers to review papers?
A recent survey provides insights into the attitudes and motivations of reviewers. Can the findings help to improve the peer review process?
Peer Review Week 2020 is here!
Find out how to get involved with this year’s activities examining trust in peer review.
Are peer review decisions arbitrary?
Mathematical model highlights the arbitrariness of peer review and finds that more innovative papers are less likely to be selected for presentation.
Turning the publication process on its head
Could medical publishing benefit from a more dynamic system, where open publications can be updated and engagement is sought across disciplines?
Peer review research needs improved collaboration and infrastructure
A recent article in Nature reveals how dedicated data sharing infrastructure may be key to facilitating systematic research into peer review processes.