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.
Ghostwriting in peer review: should journals recognise non-invited co-reviewers?
With a survey revealing that half of researchers have ghostwritten peer review reports, do peer review processes require reform?
Should researchers be able to suggest peer reviewers?
Many journals ask submitting authors to suggest recommended peer reviewers, potentially risking bias and misconduct. Do the benefits outweigh these risks?
Peer Review Week 2019 is here!
Find out how to get involved in this year’s activities on #QualityinPeerReview.
Defining the role of the peer reviewer
The tasks and responsibilities of peer reviewers are examined as a step towards reaching a consensus on their role in biomedical publishing
Could preprint servers become self-organising peer review platforms?
Researchers propose that self-organising peer review for preprints could be the future of scholarly publishing.
Tracking innovations in peer review
Discover how to track the proliferation of initiatives aimed at improving the peer review process.
Self-citation by peer reviewers: when is it appropriate and how to safeguard against malpractice
Authors and editors are asked to be vigilant, and advice to peer reviewers is updated, amidst scandal of reviewer who asked for multiple self-citations during reviews.