Visit www.europepmc.org Follow @EuropePMC_news Contact helpdesk@europepmc.org Get in touch Public peer review landscape What is possible How to get there Recommendations ●Good quality metadata ●Common taxonomies ●Linking persistent identiﬁers (PIDs) ●Centralised resources ●Community buy-in What is missing ●Consistent metadata ﬁelds cross-methods ●Complete metadata in machine readable format ●Convergence on sentiment ratings Improving public peer review accessibility and reuse Melissa Harrison Europe PMC, EMBL-EBI, Hinxton, UK Europe PMC perspective Peer review information in Europe PMC What is on the Europe PMC roadmap Growth in open peer review materials Peer reviews were added as a Crossref content type in Nov 2017. As of Apr 2022 there are ~250,000 peer reviews registered with Crossref DOIs. The majority of peer review providers* are publishers, many of whom use the Publons peer review platform. * A list of publishers that provide open peer review materials is collated from various sources: (1) Publishers that register Crossref DOIs for ‘peer-review’ content type. (2) Publishers that provide publications with ‘peer review’ section in PMC XML. (3) Publishers listed in the following publications: Beck J, Funk K, Harrison M, et al. Publishing peer review materials. F1000research 7:1655 (2018); Wolfram, D., Wang, P., Hembree, A. et al. Open peer review: promoting transparency in open science. Scientometrics 125, 1033–1051 (2020). Europe PMC ●User research: what information about peer reviews do readers want to see? ●Investigate DocMaps and Sciety: what material can we retrieve and display? ●Investigate Crossref and DataCite: what metadata can we retrieve and display? Centralised sources Ways to share peer review materials There are a variety of ways publishers are exposing journal article peer reviews (see below)*. Additionally, there is a great diversity in approaches even within a single route, for example using content types other than ‘peer-review’ when registering DOIs with Crossref. Preprint peer reviews There are at least 30 organisations** conducting peer review of preprints. These evaluations are being distributed in various ways, including as overlay journals. A little under half are included in Sciety, an aggregator of preprint peer reviews, and just over a quarter register DOIs. ** A list of preprint peer review platforms that provide open preprint review reports or comments is collated from https://reimaginereview.asapbio.org/ and https://sciety.org/ websites. Type ●Recommendations ●Reviews ●Comments ●Author response Contributors ●Author/ORCID ●Institution/ROR ●Role (reviewer, author, editor) ●Journal/platform/community Timeline ●Date of review/response ●Version applicable ●VoR publication Sentiment ●Recommend ●Recommend with suggested revisions ●Refute/Disavowal ●Peer review status for preprints from open research platforms is indicated. ●Preprints and journal articles in Europe PMC are linked to peer reviews from external sources. Review links are displayed in a dedicated section on the preprint page. ●Search option for preprints with links to reviews is provided via Advanced search. Complete machine readable metadata for peer review materials Metadata and links to reviews available from a small set of centralised sources enables Europe PMC to retrieve the information and display it consistently across all content indexed. ●Global, open, free resource for life science literature ●Partner of PubMed Central USA ●Repository of choice for 37 international funders Publications and preprints in Europe PMC are linked to additional resources: Protocols and materials Citations Author’s ORCIDs Underlying data Peer reviews Funding information