Post #3237033

2024-03-27 23:27 UTC

@nasamuffin@jorts.horse What would replace pre-publication peer review is depends on the audience. At least in biomedical research, I would estimate that >95% of publications are only read by other scientists, which can assess findings from their field of expertise while they read them (they are the peers in peer review after all). Of course not all findings are within one’s field of expertise, which is where post-publication peer review comes in. 2/4

Replies (1)

@johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org 2024-03-27 23:31

@nasamuffin@jorts.horse Post-publication peer review is public (often implemented as “comment” boxes) and can help judge work. Currently most journals do not make pre-publication reviews public, so they don’t help all that much assessing a publications individual findings. Studies that are read by a lay audience usually get there via journalists. Good press coverage of research already includes external opinions (the “not involved in the study” professors often quoted) - that too is public peer review. 3/4

Open ##3237034