Opinions about whether a critique of research is legitimate comment or personal attack can
vary between those doing the critiquing and those receiving it. In scientific publishing …

In October this year, Science published a journalistic investigation into quality of peer review
in open access journals [1]. The results were sobering. Around 60% of all journals accepted …

Peer review has long been regarded as the gold standard of scientific publication, essential
to the integrity of science itself. But, as any publishing scientist knows, peer review has its …

Peer review is a centuries-old tradition in the scientific community, and one of the most
important activities undertaken by scientific publications. The thoughtful and critical …

As an industry, whether an author, publisher, Editor or reader, we want to be facilitating the
production and dissemination of the highest quality of research, and the peer review process …

Background: Peer review is at the heart of academic publishing and has long been
instrumental in bringing good science to the forefront. Peer reviewer comments provide …

The increasing demand for swift dissemination of research findings, combined with the drive
towards transparency and open science has challenged the established approach to peer …

Peer review is an integral part of the publication process for all academics in the molecular
life sciences and beyond. You may groan about being invited to review as academic life is …

The cull comes after similar discoveries of 'fake peer review'by several other major
publishers, including London-based BioMed Central, an arm of Springer, which began …

Peer review is regarded as one of the mainstays of academic publishing. It is conceivably
the most trusted method (Nicholas et al., 2015) to weed out invalid and suspicious research …