Sam and Daniela from PREreview join us to discuss how they are making the peer review process more transparent, inclusive, and constructive. Their platform enables scientists from all career stages to engage with preprints and provide meaningful feedback before formal journal publication.
The Problem with Traditional Peer Review
The current peer review system is largely opaque. Manuscripts are sent to a small number of anonymous reviewers selected by journal editors, and the process can be riddled with biases—whether conscious or unconscious. Reviews can take months, and the feedback loop is closed off from the broader scientific community.
Key issues with the traditional model include:
- Lack of transparency in reviewer selection and evaluation criteria
- Potential for bias based on author identity, institution, or country of origin
- Limited diversity among reviewers, both in terms of demographics and scientific perspective
- Long turnaround times that delay scientific progress
- No formal training for reviewers on how to provide constructive feedback
What is PREreview?
PREreview is a platform that enables groups of scientists to collaboratively review preprints—manuscripts posted on preprint servers like bioRxiv and arXiv before formal journal peer review. The goal is to create a more open, inclusive, and constructive review process.
Training Early-Career Researchers
One of PREreview's most important contributions is training early-career researchers in constructive peer review. Many graduate students and postdocs are expected to review papers without ever receiving formal training on how to do so effectively.
PREreview organizes journal clubs centered around preprints, where participants learn to:
- Evaluate the methodology and conclusions of a study
- Provide specific, actionable, and respectful feedback
- Identify both strengths and areas for improvement
- Engage in constructive scientific dialogue
Benefits of Open, Post-Publication Peer Review
Open peer review offers several advantages over the traditional closed model:
- Transparency: When reviews are public, reviewers are more likely to be fair and constructive
- Diversity of perspectives: Anyone with relevant expertise can contribute, not just a handful of selected reviewers
- Speed: Feedback can be provided immediately after a preprint is posted, rather than waiting months for journal review
- Training: Open reviews serve as learning resources for the community
- Credit: Reviewers receive recognition for their contributions to science
Promoting Diversity and Inclusion in Science
PREreview actively works to promote diversity and inclusion in the scientific review process. By opening up peer review to a broader community, they help ensure that voices from underrepresented groups are heard and valued.
"Science benefits when we include more perspectives. PREreview is about making the review process reflect the diversity of the scientific community itself."
The Role of Preprints in Accelerating Science
Preprints have become an increasingly important part of the scientific communication landscape. By posting manuscripts on servers like bioRxiv and arXiv before formal publication, researchers can share their findings immediately with the community.
PREreview builds on this momentum by providing a structured way for the community to engage with preprints, offering feedback that can improve the quality of the final published work.
Challenges of Implementing Open Peer Review at Scale
Despite the clear benefits, implementing open peer review at scale comes with challenges:
- Incentive structures in academia still reward traditional journal publications over preprint engagement
- Some researchers worry about potential negative consequences of public criticism
- Building a sustainable community of engaged reviewers takes time and effort
- Ensuring quality and constructiveness of open reviews requires ongoing moderation and training
How Constructive Feedback Improves Scientific Quality
At its core, PREreview is about improving the quality of science through better feedback. When researchers receive thoughtful, constructive feedback early in the publication process, they can strengthen their work before it reaches the formal peer review stage. This benefits everyone—authors, reviewers, and the broader scientific community.
About Bio2040
There are so many challenges in drug discovery. We are a group of entrepreneurs and scientists who want to improve things.
Subscribe to the Podcast on iTunes
Be in the know and sign up for the newsletter.
Follow Flavio on Twitter here.