In a nutshell

At PREreview we strive to provide systematically disadvantaged researchers better ways to build skills to engage in scholarly peer review and have their voice heard. Our work is a direct response to the flawed way scientific research is evaluated. Behind closed doors, a handful of unpaid reviewers—selected opaquely and mainly through personal connections—use subjective criteria to decide the fate of a research article. This arcane process is slow and disadvantages researchers from historically underrepresented groups.

We envision a future in which every researcher is empowered with the skills to recognize and challenge bias, and is welcomed into a peer review culture where constructive feedback is expected and rewarded. We build training programs, host events and hold space for debate-based learning, and build open infrastructure to host open rapid and long-form reviews of preprints.

Goals and intentions

Lack of comments to preprints; lack of transparency and diversity in peer review; lack of formal peer review training; lack of wide adoption of preprints.

Project status
Review process
  • Review requested by
    Non-authors
  • Reviewer selected by
    Self-nominated
  • Public interaction
    Included
  • Opportunity for author response
    Not included
  • Recommendation
    Other scale or rating
Review policy
  • Review coverage
    Complete paper
  • Reviewer identity known to
    Editor or service
  • Competing interests
    Not included
Social Networks
Review features
  • Manuscript hosting
    No
  • Notes

    On the free and open source PREreview platform, users register with an ORCID iD and either using their public or pseudonymous persona can:

    - Request a review on a preprint
    - Fill out and submit a rapid review—12 yes/no/not sure/n.a. questions designed to capture the essence of the preprint
    - Compose a long-form review on a preprint, alone or in collaboration with other reviewers
    - Comment on others’ reviews
    - Endorse others’ reviews via Plaudit
    - Flag others’ reviews as violating our Code of Conduct
    - Engage with existing or even start their own communities

    Anyone who lands on the page can:

    - Search for preprints that have reviews or requests for reviews on our site
    - Read and sort through aggregated rapid reviews next to the preprint
    - Read and sort through long-form reviews next to the preprint

    NOTE: PREreview is not a preprint server, but fetches the metadata and pdf (when openly licensed) of a preprint for which a user wants to submit a review or a request for review from Google Scholar. Our goal is to provide a way for any preprint from any existing preprint server to be reviewed by any community member willing to be constructive.

  • Review of code or data
    No
  • Eligible reviewers/editors
    Anyone with an Orcid iD and willing to abide by our Code of Conduct https://content.prereview.org/coc
  • Tags or badges
    Yes
  • Criteria for inclusion

    The badges can be given to reviewers. For now we only have badges for users who have gone through our Open Reviewers mentoring and training program (https://content.prereview.org/programs).

Results
  • Number of scholarly outputs commented on
    100-1,000
  • Metrics
    Not yet.
mood_bad
  • No comments yet.
  • Add a comment