A recent article in the journal Transplantation discusses the pros and cons associated with both prepublication and postpublication peer review.

The author of the article concludes: “…prepublication peer review is an imperfect process, but traditional journals have no alternative means to control their content at the present time. Postpublication evaluation of articles by the research community is becoming an increasingly important way of discriminating between high- and low-quality studies. The challenge to traditional journals, including Transplantation, is to develop channels for open, but responsible discussion of their content.”.