Read about the results of Nature’s transparent peer review pilot and how it could benefit the research community.
ASAPbio summarise the newly developed FAST principles, a set of best practices to foster engagement in public preprint review.
Read about the pros and cons of disclosing reviewer identities as part of the open review process.
The gender gap in publications is well documented, but does peer review contribute to this bias? A recent study investigated.
Could medical publishing benefit from a more dynamic system, where open publications can be updated and engagement is sought across disciplines?
Many journals ask submitting authors to suggest recommended peer reviewers, potentially risking bias and misconduct. Do the benefits outweigh these risks?
As demand for transparency increases, many journals are adopting open peer review: learn more about best-practice guidelines for implementing such systems.
eLife is trialling a novel form of open peer review that gives authors more control over their response to reviewers.