Sign in or Register
Explore
    • A project of ASAPbio
    • About
    • Add listing
    • Glossary
    • Blog
    Explore

    Peer Feedback

    Journal-agnostic peer review service that produces an “Evaluated Preprint”

    • Share
    • Bookmark
    • Profile
    • Comments 0
    • prev
    • next
    • Website
    • prev
    • next
    In a nutshell

    Note that this project has evolved into Review Commons.

    We propose the creation of a scientist-driven, journal-agnostic peer review service that facilitates subsequent publication in a journal after creation of an "Evaluated Preprint." Review would be conducted by members of an extensive review board and be coordinated by professional editors. We anticipate that the majority of papers that pass through Peer Feedback will not need to be reviewed again, or could be reviewed only for journal suitability. We also hope that the system will promote better journal matching with less rejection since editors will have better information on the submission.

    Overview
    • Type of project

      Project

    • Operated by

      Ron Vale, Tony Hyman, and Jessica Polka

    • Listing status

      Verified

    • Website

      https://asapbio.org/peer-feedback

    Goals and intentions

    By conducing peer review before journal submission, Peer Feedback aims to make review more constructive by focusing attention on the science in a manuscript, not its suitability for a given journal. It also aims to reduce repeated peer reviewing that can occur during serial journal submission.

    Functions of the project
    • Feedback to authors
    • Validation of soundness
    Areas of innovation
    • Quality of review
    • Speed
    • Transparency
    What is reviewed
    • Manuscript hosting

      No

    Types of outputs
    • Preprints
    Gallery
    Format of review
    • Free-form commenting
    Process
    • Author initiates review
    • Journal integration
    • Professional editors
    Transparency
    • Open reports
    Review features
    • Criteria for inclusion

      Upon receipt, submissions are subjected to an initial screening process that checks for adherence to relevant publishing guidelines such as plagiarism. However, the existence of an Evaluated Preprint by itself does not imply quality; readers would have to evaluate the reviews themselves.

    mood_bad
  • No comments yet.
  • Add a comment

    Leave a Reply · Cancel reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    Partners

    ReimagineReview is a project of ASAPbio funded by CZI and developed in partnership with Wellcome and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

      

    License

    Except where otherwise noted, text on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license by ASAPbio. Listing data (text and multiple-choice responses) are released under the CC0 public domain waiver. All project and service logos, images, videos, and brands are property of their respective owners and should not be reused without permission, except where otherwise noted.

    person
    Sign in
    personDon't have an account?
    lockForgot password?
    person
    Create an account

    Your personal data will be used to support your experience throughout this website, to manage access to your account, and for other purposes described in our privacy policy.

    Already Registered?

    Cart

      • Facebook
      • Twitter
      • WhatsApp
      • Telegram
      • LinkedIn
      • Tumblr
      • VKontakte
      • Mail
      • Copy link