Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to the producers of the work. It constitutes a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a relevant field - wikipedia 
Peer review. evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to the producers of the work
- wikimedia.org
Peer review methods are employed to maintain standards of quality, improve performance, and provide credibility. In academia, scholarly peer review is often used to determine an academic paper's suitability for publication.
- Future innovations in peer review - f1000research
- https://dgraziotin.shinyapps.io/peerreviewtimeline/
- https://www.hsl.virginia.edu/collections/publishing/PeerReview.pdf
- Does Peer Review Work: An Experiment of Experimentalism - heinonline.org
- Scientometrics - springer.com
- Review Criteria for Research Manuscripts 2015 - pdf
- Jon Tennant on orcid
- The State of The Art in Peer Review - osf.io
- Science Policy Research Gateway - f1000research
Medical peer review may refer to clinical peer review, or the peer evaluation of clinical teaching skills for both physicians and nurses - wikipedia
# Current innovations
The ongoing discussions and innovations around peer review (and OPR) can be sorted into four main categories, which are examined in more detail below. Each of these feed into the wider core issues in peer review of incentivizing engagement, providing appropriate recognition and certification, and quality control and moderation: 1. Giving credit to peer reviewers 2. Should referee reports be published alongside manuscripts; 3. Should referees remain anonymous or have their identities disclosed; 4. Should peer review occur prior or subsequent to the publication process (i.e., publish then filter). 1. Blockchain based peer review 1. Liquid Peer Review
# Future research
Some progress is already being made on this front, coming from across a range of stakeholder groups. This includes:
1. A new journal, Research Integrity and Peer Review, to encourage further study into the integrity of research publication - biomedcentral.com
1. The International Congress on Peer Review and Scientific Publication, which aims to encourage research into the quality and credibility of peer review - peerreviewcongress.org
1. The PEERE initiative, which has the objectives of improving the efficiency, transparency and accountability of peer review - peere.org
# Recommendation services
Post-publication evaluation and recommendation of significant articles, often through a peer-nominated consortium
- F1000 Prime - CiteULike
- __Pros:__ crowd-sourced literature discovery, time saving, “prestige” factor when inside a consortium - __Cons:__ paid services (subscription only), time consuming on recommender side, exclusive
# Annotation services
Comments or highlights added directly to highlighted sections of the work. Added notes can be private or public
- PubPeer - Hypothesis - PaperHive - PeerLibrary
- __Pros:__ rapid, crowd-sourced and collaborative, cross-publisher, low threshold for entry - __Cons:__ non-interoperable, multiple venues, effort duplication, relatively unused, genuine critiques reserved
# The Problems of peer review
The Problems of peer review are numerous. On the other hand editors, and most of the scientific community are convinced (even though it is hard to find supporting evidence for the belief), that peer review is invaluable.
In his book, The Trouble with Medical journals, Richard Smith (former editor of the BMJ) writes:
Our studies so far have shown that it is slow, expensive, ineefective, something of a lottery, prone to bias and abuse, and hopeless at spotting errors and fraud.The Trouble with Medical Journals - p8"
On the other hand editors, and most of the scientific community are convinced (even though it is hard to find supporting evidence for the belief), that peer review is invaluable.
# Government Policy
The State of California is the only U.S. state to mandate scientific peer review. In 1997, the California Governor signed into law Senate Bill 1320 (Sher), Chapter 295, statutes of 1997, which mandates that, before any CalEPA Board, Department, or Office adopts a final version of a rule-making, the scientific findings, conclusions, and assumptions on which the proposed rule are based must be submitted for independent external scientific peer review. This requirement is incorporated into the California Health and Safety Code Section 57004.What is Scientific Peer Review?
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, through UNECE Environmental Performance Reviews, uses peer review, referred to as peer learning, to evaluate progress made by its member countries in improving their environmental policies.
The European Union has been using peer review in the 'Open Method of Co-ordination' of policies in the fields of active labour market policy since 1999. In 2004, a program of peer reviews started in social inclusion.
Each program sponsors about eight peer review meetings in each year, in which a 'host country' lays a given policy or initiative open to examination by half a dozen other countries and the relevant European-level NGOs.
These usually meet over two days and include visits to local sites where the policy can be seen in operation. The meeting is preceded by the compilation of an expert report on which participating 'peer countries' submit comments. The results are published on the web - wikipedia
# Criticism
To an outsider, the anonymous, pre-publication peer review process is opaque - wikipedia
Certain journals are accused of not carrying out stringent peer review in order to more easily expand their customer base, particularly in journals where authors pay a fee before publication - sagepub.com
# Medical peer review
Medical peer review may be distinguished in four classifications: - wikipedia
1. Clinical peer review
2. Peer evaluation of clinical teaching skills for both physicians and nurses - wikipedia
3. Scientific peer review of journal articles
4. Secondary round of peer review for the clinical value of articles concurrently published in medical journals.
Additionally, "medical peer review" has been used by the American Medical Association to refer not only to the process of improving quality and safety in health care organizations, but also to the process of rating clinical behavior or compliance with professional society membership standards. Thus, the terminology has poor standardization and specificity, particularly as a database search term.
# keywords Open Peer Review, Social Media, Web 2.0, Open Science, Scholarly Publishing, Incentives, Quality Control
# See also
- Congress on Peer Review - Giving credit to peer reviewers - Henry Oldenburg creator of peer review - Academic publishing - Scientific literature - Objectivity (philosophy)
- Problems of Peer Review - Peer Review Scam - Who's Afraid of Peer Review? - Peer review is ineffective
- Reforming Peer Review - books.google.co.uk
- Collaborative document review - wikipedia
- Alternatives to peer review - frontiersin.org
- http://liquidpub.org/
- LiquidPub on slideshare.net
- LiquidPub on researchgate