How open is your peer review? - Julius Symposium 2017

Traditionally, peer review has been the gateway to the published journal article. In biomedical sciences, it usually is anonymous, not accessible to readers, and without recognition for peer reviewers. New initiatives in publishing, including the growth in preprint servers and independent platforms for peer review, aim to change this, making peer review more continuous, open and accountable. Is this good for science, or will it harm researchers' careers? We will discuss pros and cons of (and perhaps even your experiences with) new forms and organisation of peer review, from the perspective of the author, the reader and the reviewer. You will leave this workshop with a concrete overview of peer review alternatives and an inspired view of the role of peer review.