The state of the art in peer review
- PMID: 30137294
- PMCID: PMC6140953
- DOI: 10.1093/femsle/fny204
The state of the art in peer review
Abstract
Scholarly communication is in a perpetual state of disruption. Within this, peer review of research articles remains an essential part of the formal publication process, distinguishing it from virtually all other modes of communication. In the last several years, there has been an explosive wave of innovation in peer review research, platforms, discussions, tools and services. This is largely coupled with the ongoing and parallel evolution of scholarly communication as it adapts to rapidly changing environments, within what is widely considered as the 'open research' or 'open science' movement. Here, we summarise the current ebb and flow around changes to peer review and consider its role in a modern digital research and communications infrastructure and suggest why uptake of new models of peer review appears to have been so low compared to what is often viewed as the 'traditional' method of peer review. Finally, we offer some insight into the potential futures of scholarly peer review and consider what impacts this might have on the broader scholarly research ecosystem. In particular, we focus on the key traits of certification and reputation, moderation and quality control and engagement incentives, and discuss how these interact with socio-technical aspects of peer review and academic culture.
Similar articles
-
Scientific Authors in a Changing World of Scholarly Communication: What Does the Future Hold?Am J Med. 2020 Jan;133(1):26-31. doi: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2019.07.028. Epub 2019 Aug 13. Am J Med. 2020. PMID: 31419421 Review.
-
A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review.F1000Res. 2017 Jul 20;6:1151. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.12037.3. eCollection 2017. F1000Res. 2017. PMID: 29188015 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Current market rates for scholarly publishing services.F1000Res. 2021 Jan 12;10:20. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.27468.2. eCollection 2021. F1000Res. 2021. PMID: 34316354 Free PMC article.
-
Rewarding peer reviewers: maintaining the integrity of science communication.J Korean Med Sci. 2015 Apr;30(4):360-4. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2015.30.4.360. Epub 2015 Mar 19. J Korean Med Sci. 2015. PMID: 25829801 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Rules to be adopted for publishing a scientific paper.Ann Ital Chir. 2016;87:1-3. Ann Ital Chir. 2016. PMID: 28474609
Cited by
-
Ten simple rules for failing successfully in academia.PLoS Comput Biol. 2022 Dec 15;18(12):e1010538. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010538. eCollection 2022 Dec. PLoS Comput Biol. 2022. PMID: 36520776 Free PMC article.
-
Which peer reviewers voluntarily reveal their identity to authors? Insights into the consequences of open-identities peer review.Proc Biol Sci. 2021 Oct 27;288(1961):20211399. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2021.1399. Epub 2021 Oct 27. Proc Biol Sci. 2021. PMID: 34702079 Free PMC article.
-
A Novel Individual Mentored Methodology to Peer Review for Residents/Fellows.JSLS. 2021 Jul-Sep;25(3):e2021.00036. doi: 10.4293/JSLS.2021.00036. JSLS. 2021. PMID: 34354331 Free PMC article.
-
Asthma in Adult Patients with COVID-19. Prevalence and Risk of Severe Disease.Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021 Apr 1;203(7):893-905. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202008-3266OC. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2021. PMID: 33493416 Free PMC article.
-
Guidelines for open peer review implementation.Res Integr Peer Rev. 2019 Feb 27;4:4. doi: 10.1186/s41073-019-0063-9. eCollection 2019. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2019. PMID: 30858990 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Allen H, Boxer E, Cury A et al. . What does better peer review look like? Definitions, essential areas, and recommendations for better practice. Open Science Framework 2018. 10.31219/osf.io/4mfk2. - DOI
-
- Bastian H. The Fractured Logic of Blinded Peer Review in Journals. 2017. http://blogs.plos.org/absolutely-maybe/2017/10/31/the-fractured-logic-of....
-
- Bedeian AG. The manuscript review process. J Manag Inquiry 2003;12:331–8.
-
- Birgit Schmidt, Edit Gorogh. New toolkits on the block: Peer review alternatives in scholarly communication, Expanding Perspectives on Open Science: Communities, Cultures and Diversity in Concepts and Practices: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Electronic Publishing. 2017; page 62.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources