Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (15)
Similaire à Innovation in peer review
Similaire à Innovation in peer review (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Innovation in peer review
- 1. Maria Kowalczuk, PhD Deputy Biology Editor, BioMed Central Innovation in Peer Review http://www.meta-activism.org/2011/05/fixing-peer-review-freeing-knowledge-creation/
- 2. 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.
- 3. Pitfalls of traditional peer review • Slow • Expensive to manage • Inconsistent • Bias • Favouritism • Abuse http://www.eusci.org.uk/articles/exploring-scientific-peer-review
- 4. 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
- 5. 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
- 10. Biology Direct PubMed record
- 11. 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
- 12. 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
- 14. Portable peer review Flagships Subject-specific journals BMC Research Notes BMC series BMC Neuroscience BMC Public Health BMC Independent Journals
- 15. Neuroscience Peer Review Consortium
- 23. Post publication peer review via comments • PubMed Commons • PubPeer.com • Research Gate • Frontiers • BioMed Central and other publishers
- 24. Conclusions Peer review is under scrutiny Developments in peer review include: Open peer review Minimizing re-review Portable peer review Technical peer review Peer review decoupled from journal Post publication peer review
- 25. Thank you! Maria Kowalczuk, PhD Deputy Biology Editor, BioMed Central Maria.Kowalczuk@biomedcentral.com Any questions?