Key Issue: Post-publication peer review, in all its guises, is here to stay

Insights: the UKSG Journal

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 107-110

  Markie, Michael ^a  

^a F1000Research   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85016208608     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20487754     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1629/uksg.245     Document Type: Review

References (11)

1. Hunter, J, Post-publication peer review: opening up scientific conversation, Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 2012, (63); DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2012.00063 (accessed 29 May 2015).
2. F1000Research: http://f1000research.com/(accessed 29 May 2015).
3. ResearchGate: Introducing Open Review: http://www.researchgate.net/publicliterature.OpenReviewInfo.html (accessed 29 May 2015).
4. PubPeer: https://pubpeer.com/(accessed 29 May 2015).
5. PubMed Commons: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedcommons/(accessed 29 May 2015).
6. F1000Prime: http://f1000.com/prime (accessed 29 May 2015).
7. Joynson, C, Leyser, O, The culture of scientific research. [v1; ref status: indexed, http://f1000r.es/53j], 2015, F1000Res 4, 66;
8. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6163.1.
9. Alberts, B, Kirschner, M, Tilghman, S and Varmus, H, (2014) Rescuing US biomedical research from its systemic flaws. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (PNAS) USA, 111, 5773-5777; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1404402111.
10. Bastian, H, A stronger post-publication culture is needed for better science, PLOS Medicine, 2014, 11: e1001772; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001772 (accessed 29 May 2015).
11. Knoepfler, P, Reviewing post-publication peer review, Trends in Genetics, 2015; DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2015.03.006.