eLife is trialling a novel form of open peer review that gives authors more control over their response to reviewers.
Get up to date on how gender influences the academic publishing process and what can be done to establish gender equity.
Mary Yianni, Publisher at Taylor and Francis, reviews the different models of peer review and the emerging role of preprints.
Jonathan Patience, Senior Editor at Taylor & Francis, outlines the pathway to publication.
Missed the 14th Annual Meeting of ISMPP? Read the second part of our meeting report to get up to speed!
Researchers argue that lay review will increase the relevance of medical publications: a new study aims to evaluate its impact.
Can preprints be cited in the same way as papers published in a peer reviewed journal, or do we need to define new standards?
Are we too willing to accept big data as fact? Find out how scientific publishing can learn from common mistakes arising from bad data practice.
As PubMed Commons closes due to lack of use, what does this tell us about engagement with medical publications and post-publication peer review?
Join other medical, science, and publications professionals worldwide to #PressforProgress on #IWD2018 and beyond.
Public Library of Science (PLOS) recently announced that all articles submitted to PLOS journals will automatically be published as preprints on bioRxiv.
Missed TIPPA 2018? Read our meeting report to get up to speed!
Missed ISMPP EU 2018? Read our meeting report to get up to speed!
The argument for blinded peer review seems less and less plausible, argues Hilda Bastian in a recent post for PLOS blogs. She suggests that such blinding constitutes a trade-off between … Continue Reading Is blinded peer review fair?
A major factor in the under-representation of women in research, gender bias is widespread in scholarly activities, including publications. A report published earlier this year by the American Geophysical Union … Continue Reading The ‘networking effect’: how author networks can cause gender bias in peer review
Fake reviews continue to be a serious concern in medical publishing, putting data integrity and trust in the scientific community at risk. As recently reported by Retraction Watch, a new … Continue Reading New tool to identify fakes in the peer review process