Universal Principled Review: A Community-Driven Method to Improve Peer Review

The Future Immunology Consortium

doi:10.1016/j.cell.2019.11.029

Universal Principled Review: A Community-Driven Method to Improve Peer Review

The Future Immunology Consortium

Microbiology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › peer-review

6 Scopus citations

Abstract

Despite being a staple of our science, the process of pre-publication peer review has few agreed-upon standards defining its goals or ideal execution. As a community of reviewers and authors, we assembled an evaluation format and associated specific standards for the process as we think it should be practiced. We propose that we apply, debate, and ultimately extend these to improve the transparency of our criticism and the speed with which quality data and ideas become public.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	1441-1445
Number of pages	5
Journal	Cell
Volume	179
Issue number	7
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.11.029
State	Published - Dec 12 2019

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier Inc.

Access

10.1016/j.cell.2019.11.029

OpenUrl availability

Full text

Cite this

@article{54bae441484641e3a2bd7e6579d6f3bf,

title = "Universal Principled Review: A Community-Driven Method to Improve Peer Review",

abstract = "Despite being a staple of our science, the process of pre-publication peer review has few agreed-upon standards defining its goals or ideal execution. As a community of reviewers and authors, we assembled an evaluation format and associated specific standards for the process as we think it should be practiced. We propose that we apply, debate, and ultimately extend these to improve the transparency of our criticism and the speed with which quality data and ideas become public.",

author = "{The Future Immunology Consortium} and Matthew Krummel and Catherine Blish and Michael Kuhns and Ken Cadwell and Andrew Oberst and Ananda Goldrath and Ansel, {K. Mark} and Hongbo Chi and Ryan O'Connell and Wherry, {E. John} and Marion Pepper and Igor Brodsky and John Chang and Arron, {Joseph R.} and Nick Haining and Deepta Bhattacharya and Mark Anderson and Rothlin, {Carla V.} and Susan Schwab and Yasmine Belkaid and Ari Molofsky and Pete Savage and Daniel Mucida and Akiko Iwasaki and Gabriel Victora and Jessica Hamerman and David Masopust and Greg Barton and Susan Kaech and Prescott Woodruff and Stetson, {Daniel B.} and Scharschmidt, {Tiffany C.} and Ross Kedl and Z{\'u}{\~n}iga, {Elina Isabel} and Alexander Hoffmann and Matt Williams and Mayer-Barber, {Katrin D.} and Sunny Shin and Steven Bensinger and Lu, {Li Fan} and Mark Looney and Round, {June L.} and Sebastian Amigorena and Jonathan Yewdell and Joseph Sun and Harty, {John T.}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2019 Elsevier Inc.",

year = "2019",

month = dec,

day = "12",

doi = "10.1016/j.cell.2019.11.029",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "179",

pages = "1441--1445",

journal = "Cell",

issn = "0092-8674",

publisher = "Cell Press",

number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Universal Principled Review

T2 - A Community-Driven Method to Improve Peer Review

AU - The Future Immunology Consortium

AU - Krummel, Matthew

AU - Blish, Catherine

AU - Kuhns, Michael

AU - Cadwell, Ken

AU - Oberst, Andrew

AU - Goldrath, Ananda

AU - Ansel, K. Mark

AU - Chi, Hongbo

AU - O'Connell, Ryan

AU - Wherry, E. John

AU - Pepper, Marion

AU - Brodsky, Igor

AU - Chang, John

AU - Arron, Joseph R.

AU - Haining, Nick

AU - Bhattacharya, Deepta

AU - Anderson, Mark

AU - Rothlin, Carla V.

AU - Schwab, Susan

AU - Belkaid, Yasmine

AU - Molofsky, Ari

AU - Savage, Pete

AU - Mucida, Daniel

AU - Iwasaki, Akiko

AU - Victora, Gabriel

AU - Hamerman, Jessica

AU - Masopust, David

AU - Barton, Greg

AU - Kaech, Susan

AU - Woodruff, Prescott

AU - Stetson, Daniel B.

AU - Scharschmidt, Tiffany C.

AU - Kedl, Ross

AU - Zúñiga, Elina Isabel

AU - Hoffmann, Alexander

AU - Williams, Matt

AU - Mayer-Barber, Katrin D.

AU - Shin, Sunny

AU - Bensinger, Steven

AU - Lu, Li Fan

AU - Looney, Mark

AU - Round, June L.

AU - Amigorena, Sebastian

AU - Yewdell, Jonathan

AU - Sun, Joseph

AU - Harty, John T.

PY - 2019/12/12

Y1 - 2019/12/12

N2 - Despite being a staple of our science, the process of pre-publication peer review has few agreed-upon standards defining its goals or ideal execution. As a community of reviewers and authors, we assembled an evaluation format and associated specific standards for the process as we think it should be practiced. We propose that we apply, debate, and ultimately extend these to improve the transparency of our criticism and the speed with which quality data and ideas become public.

AB - Despite being a staple of our science, the process of pre-publication peer review has few agreed-upon standards defining its goals or ideal execution. As a community of reviewers and authors, we assembled an evaluation format and associated specific standards for the process as we think it should be practiced. We propose that we apply, debate, and ultimately extend these to improve the transparency of our criticism and the speed with which quality data and ideas become public.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85076306664&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85076306664&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.cell.2019.11.029

DO - 10.1016/j.cell.2019.11.029

M3 - Comment/debate

C2 - 31835023

AN - SCOPUS:85076306664

SN - 0092-8674

VL - 179

SP - 1441

EP - 1445

JO - Cell

JF - Cell

IS - 7

ER -

Universal Principled Review: A Community-Driven Method to Improve Peer Review

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Access

OpenUrl availability

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this