Articles tagged with Prepublication Review
The journal addresses ethical challenges, best practices, and scientific integrity issues through metascience and evidence-based research standards. Emerging technologies like AI are transforming how researchers conduct, communicate, and disseminate their work.
A Taylor & Francis journal has found high levels of author satisfaction with the quality, speed, and decision-making under a transparent peer review model. Authors valued constructive feedback, and most reported they would submit or review again due to the journal's support for transparency.
The peer review process in biomedical journals is expected to undergo a significant transformation with the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) by 2025. AI will assist editors in making decisions on which articles to send out for external peer review, potentially increasing efficiency and effectiveness.
Biology Open's Fast & Fair peer review pilot has successfully reduced publication delays by recruiting contracted reviewers who are paid per manuscript. The innovative system, launched in July 2024, ensures high-quality reviews within 7 business days, often faster.
The growing use of preprints has led to a reevaluation of the traditional peer-review system. Researchers are encouraged to adopt open and constructive peer review practices. New guidelines aim to accelerate this shift, promoting collaboration and improving science culture.
Rapid Reviews Infectious Diseases will extend the successful preprint review model of Rapid Reviews COVID-19 to new research on infectious diseases like monkeypox, dengue fever, or herpes. The journal aims to accelerate the validation and diffusion of robust scientific findings through rapid peer review.
Review Commons is expanding its scope and scale with added funding, welcoming Biochemical Journal, Genes & Development, Genome Biology, and Immunology & Cell Biology as new affiliate journals. The platform now supports a diverse range of publishers and enables authors to reuse peer reviews for multiple journal submissions.
A study by Michigan State University researchers found that authors from historically excluded groups face worse peer review outcomes, with authors from Asia and countries with low social and economic development facing rejection rates of up to 50% higher than those from Western countries. The study suggests that journals can adopt sol...
The new open access journal aims to deliver real-time, verified scientific information on COVID-19 research, sourced from all regions and fields, in a transparent process. Experts will produce expert reviews in days, using AI tools to identify promising scholarship.
Researchers suggest revising Transparency and Openness (TOP) Guidelines to facilitate meta-research on peer review effectiveness. Journals can choose tier levels of transparency, with higher risk involved. This would legitimize and advertise relative quality of peer review processes, improving scientific literature.
The low FODMAP diet has been found to be an effective treatment option for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), with a significant body of evidence supporting its efficacy. The long-term effects of this dietary approach, however, require further investigation.
A WHO Task Force calculated illnesses, deaths, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) for four chemicals: dioxin, aflatoxin, peanut allergen, and cyanide in cassava. Aflatoxin was associated with the highest global DALYs, while dioxin caused the most illnesses.
Researchers found a 5% improvement in peer review report quality when articles underwent open peer review compared to single-blind models. Author-suggested reviewers also tended to recommend acceptance more often than non-author suggested reviewers.
A team of biologists reviewed nearly 900,000 experiments and found non-blind trials averaged a 27% stronger result than blind trials. The study suggests less than one in four experiments used blind data recording.
Jigisha Patel argues that peer review should be recognized as a professional skill and that trained reviewers can improve the quality of randomized controlled trials. By implementing a 'quality assurance' symbol, trials could be identified as having undergone rigorous peer review.
GeoResJ aims to publish top research in the entire earth science field with rapid publication and open access. Elsevier's new journal joins its existing earth and planetary science journals offering authors more choice for scope and access.
A new set of guidelines for abstracts in systematic reviews and meta-analyses aims to provide a robust summary of research. The PRISMA for Abstracts checklist helps authors present an explicit summary of results, facilitating quick assessment and efficient perusal.
PeerJ, founded on principles of affordability, innovation, and Open Access, publishes its first 30 peer-reviewed articles, offering a rapid, peer-reviewed journal with a Creative Commons license. The organization assembles an Editorial Board of 800 esteemed academics to ensure rigorous peer review and high standards in publication.
A new study published in PLoS ONE found that cooperative interactions between reviewers and authors increase reviewing accuracy, with a 13% rise in accuracy under open review models. Reviewers and authors who participated in these interactions had an 11% higher accuracy rate.
The study found that open peer review fosters cooperation between reviewers and authors, leading to higher accuracy. Non-anonymous open review systems reward good reviewers, whereas traditional closed reviews do not.
Recent safety studies by the National Toxicology Program will be reviewed by a public meeting on May 18. The studies include chloral hydrate, napthalene, and indium phosphide.