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 and review. What is curation? We began the session by brainstorming what curation encompasses. Through a mind-mapping exercise,…
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 evolutionary bridge between a system based around journal-organized peer review and referred preprints. Peer reviewing: for whom and why? The…
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 early career researchers. Who is a “peer?” The session began with Daniela Saderi leading us in discussion about…
Participating journals are interested in recruiting editors and/or reviewers based on the public feedback they’ve provided on preprints. Join the network to share your experience in writing comments and reviews on preprints. Preprint feedback has the potential to not only help authors and readers, but also to identify potential reviewers and editorial board members for…
Fostering public preprint feedback through crowd preprint review While there is increasing interest in preprint review activities, the level of public commenting and reviewing on preprints remains low overall. To explore review modalities that may foster participation in preprint review, in 2021 ASAPbio started activities to facilitate public reviews on preprints inspired in the crowd…
Blog post by Daniela Saderi and Sarah Greaves In May 2020 a group of publishers and organisations made a direct call in response to the urgent need to openly and rapidly share and review COVID-19 research. More than 2,000 reviewers signed up: their details were shared with the journals or platforms involved, and they were…
This post originally appeared on the Review Commons blog. Review Commons is announcing two new policies today: As of August 1, 2021, Review Commons will require all authors to post their manuscript as a preprint, prior to transfer to an affiliate journal1. In return, all the affiliate journals provide authors with scooping protection from the date of posting of the…
Public feedback on preprints can unlock their full potential to accelerate science. Public preprint review can help authors improve their paper, find new collaborators, and gain visibility. It also helps readers find interesting and relevant papers and contextualize them with the reactions of experts in the field. Never has this been more apparent than in…
Organizer Thomas Lemberger, EMBO Website or social media links https://eeb.embo.org https://reviewcommons.org Current stage of development EEB is an experimental platform under development and used as sandbox to test ideas about aggregation and mining of refereed preprints. Project duration 3 years How has your project changed? In view of the feedback received we have decided to…
Organizer Ms Joy Owango (TCC Africa) and Ms Jo Havemann (AfricArXiv) Website or social media links https://www.tcc-africa.org/ https://info.africarxiv.org/ Joy Owango: joy.owango@tcc-africa.orgJohanna Havemann: info@access2perspectives.com // jo@africarxiv.org Current stage of development AfricArXiv is an Open Access portal launched in June 2018, which serves primarily as a preprint repository. Beyond that it serves as a hub and…
Organizers Daniela Saderi (PREreview Co-Founder and Director) and Sarah Greaves (STM Publishing Consultant) Website or social media links OASPA announcement Project website Digital Science Blog Post: “Does creating a rapid reviewer pool improve trust in COVID-19 peer review?” Digital Science Blog Post: “Creating a rapid reviewer pool…..and trying to use it” Poster (Zenodo) Current stage…
Organizer Felix Richter (Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, University of Oxford) Nicolas Vabret (Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York) Website COVID-19 Literature Review Oxford COVID-19 Mount Sinai References: 1 Vabret N, Samstein R, Fernandez N, Merad M; Sinai Immunology Review Project; Trainees; Faculty. Advancing scientific knowledge in times of pandemics. Nat Rev Immunol.…
Organizer PREreview: Antoinette Foster, Monica Granados, Samantha Hindle, Katrina Murphy, Daniela Saderi Simply Secure: Georgia Bullen, Carissa Yao Website or social media links https://prereview.org https://twitter.com/PREreview_ https://github.com/prereview Current stage of development Ongoing / idea Project duration 2 years Update How has your project changed? The Sprint confirmed that our project roadmap is developing along the right…
Organizer Life Science Editors (Helen Pickersgill, Angela Andersen, Marie Bao, Carol Featherstone, Shawna Hiley, Sabbi Lall, Li-Kuo Su) Website or social media links www.lifescienceeditors.com Current stage of development Idea Project duration Indefinitely Update How has your project changed? We introduced an additional option to incentivize authors to initiate peer review. As an alternative to requesting…
Organizer Louis Fisher and Huw Williams (CrowdPeer) Website or social media links www.thecrowdpeer.com https://twitter.com/crowdpeer Current stage of development Ongoing Project Project duration Indefinite Update How has your project changed? Added a code of conduct to guide intended use. Added reviewer guidance section describing what comments are expected within the comments section. Further developed reviewer recognition…
Organizer Joseph Wade, Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health Website or social media links @wadelab Current stage of development Ready to be implemented Project duration One year initially, but potentially indefinitely. Update How has your project changed? We introduced an additional option to incentivize authors to initiate peer review. As an alternative to…
Organizer Daniel Mietchen, School of Data Science, University of Virginia, @EvoMRI Project status ongoing Project duration ongoing Project aims Background Peer review of preprints typically has two main components (a) general comments on parameters like the quality, scope, topicality or structure of the manuscript and (b) comments on details, e.g. inaccuracies, missing references, confusing plot parameters,…
This week marks Open Access Week 2020, which is running with the theme “Open with Purpose: Taking Action to Build Structural Equity and Inclusion.” The theme provides a reminder that openness in science communication is a means to other uses rather than just an ultimate goal in itself. The same principle applies to preprints; we…
2021-10-18 correction: In the original version of this post, the data labels for “accepted” and “rejected” re-review rates were swapped. The correct labels now appear below. In late 2019, EMBO and ASAPbio launched Review Commons, a platform for journal-independent peer review that facilitates the posting of a refereed preprint and submission to 17 partner journals.…
Join the #PreprintReviewChallenge: Help us create the largest collection of preprint reviews in a day On September 22, ASAPbio will be hosting an online live preprint review event as part of Peer Review Week 2020. We will get together to write constructive comments and reviews on preprints, with the aim to develop the largest collection to date of…