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
Top Related