Maria Kowalczuk, PhDDeputy Biology Editor, BioMed Central

Innovation in Peer Review

http://www.meta-activism.org/2011/05/fixing-peer-review-freeing-knowledge-creation/

Traditional peer review

• Peer review in the current form has been used since 1960s.

• Traditionally scientific journals use single blind peer review or double blind peer review models.

• Online publishing and open access have changed the publishing landscape while peer review process has remained the same.

Pitfalls of traditional peer review• Slow• Expensive to manage• Inconsistent • Bias• Favouritism• Abuse

http://www.eusci.org.uk/articles/exploring-scientific-peer-review

Innovative peer review models• Open peer review• Minimal re-review• Portable peer review• Technical peer review• Decoupled peer review• Post publication peer review

http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2011/3/20/peer-review-not-for-the-short-sighted-josh-87.html

Open (non-anonymous) peer review

Randomised Controlled Trial (BMJ 1999; 318: 23 – 27): - no effect on report quality, recommendation, or time taken to review- increased likelihood of reviewers declining to review

Biology Direct PubMed record

Publishing peer review documents

- In all 4 EMBO publications, including EMBO J, EMBO Reports- ‘Peer Review Process File’ shows all referee reports , author responses and editorial

decision letters- Referees remain anonymous; opt-out is possible - 95% of take-up rate; willingness of referees to review unchanged

Authors can opt out of re-review; if the editors judge the revisions sufficient, the article is published, often accompanied by a critical Commentary.Discussed in Editorial: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7007/11/18.

Re-review opt-out – BMC Biology

Portable peer review

Flagships

Subject-specific journals

BMC Research Notes

BMC seriesBMC NeuroscienceBMC Public Health

BMC Independent Journals

Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium

Technical peer review

Post publication peer review via comments

• PubMed Commons• PubPeer.com• Research Gate• Frontiers• BioMed Central and other publishers

Conclusions Peer review is under scrutiny Developments in peer review include:

Open peer reviewMinimizing re-reviewPortable peer reviewTechnical peer reviewPeer review decoupled from journalPost publication peer review

Thank you!Maria Kowalczuk, PhD

Deputy Biology Editor, BioMed CentralMaria.Kowalczuk@biomedcentral.com

Any questions?