Skip to navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to footer

Blog Category: FeedbackASAP

Matrix of eight icons representing different peer review types. Icons include a review request, reviewer selection, public interaction, author response, decisions, review coverage, reviewer identity, and competing interests marked with text and symbols.

Introducing PReF: Preprint Review Features

This post originally appeared on ReimagineReview. Preprint reviews hold the potential to build trust in preprints and drive innovation in peer review.

Jan 27, 2022

Read More

The image is an infographic on improving scientific discourse, using the acronym FAST. It stands for Focused, Appropriate, Specific, and Transparent, with each term describing related actions for effective peer review and communication.

FAST principles for a thriving preprint feedback culture

While preprints have been adopted as a means to promptly disseminate research, they also open up new ways to participate in the scientific discourse around the latest research. There are many benefits to public feedback on preprints: comments that can help authors improve their work, broader opportunities for early career researchers to participate in review, and additional context for readers.

Screenshot of a webpage titled Preprint Newsletter with a signup option for a weekly newsletter. It lists subject areas including COVID, Medical and Health Sciences, Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Bioinformatics, Ecology, and Evolutionary Biology.

Tackling information overload: identifying relevant preprints and reviewers

The growth of preprints in the life sciences has amplified earlier concerns about the challenges of keeping abreast of the latest research findings. Researchers need to keep up to date not only with the most recent publications in journals but also with the latest scholarly work posted on preprint servers.

Books arranged by color on shelves from top to bottom, transitioning from red, orange, yellow, green to blue, creating a rainbow effect. A small sign reads Decorative Books. A price tag shows $19.00.

Curation and review in the preprint landscape

By Victoria Yan At the ASAPbio #FeedbackASAP meeting held on July 21st, 2021, the Sciety team (Hannah Drury, Godwyns Onwuchekwa, and Paul Shannon) led an interactive session examining different aspects of the evolving landscape of preprint curation a... Through a mind-mapping exercise, the group identified highlighting, providing context, and selecting articles as some examples of what curation means.

Text on a light blue background describes two commitments for journal reviewers. One: Review articles already available as preprints and share reviews publicly. Two: Only review preprinted articles and share reviews publicly.

Considering campaigns to post journal reviews on preprints

As part of the July 21, 2021 FeedbackASAP meeting, Ludo Waltman (CWTS, Leiden University), James Fraser (UCSF), Cooper Smout (Free Our Knowledge) organized a breakout session entitled “Posting journal reviews on preprints” to identity an evolutio... The organizers opened the session with some prompts to gauge participants’ experiences with preprinting and peer review.

Formal education in reviewing manuscripts is rare

Public preprint review as a tool to empower the next generation of socially-conscious peer reviewers

By Rebeccah Lijek and Jessica Polka At the July 21, 2021 #FeedbackASAP meeting, Mugdha Sathe (UW), Rebeccah Lijek (Mount Holyoke), Daniela Saderi (PREreview) organized a breakout session on using public preprint review in teaching and mentorship of e... Becki Lijek presented data corroborating these experiences from her recent survey, which showed that peer review training is rare.

1 2 3