the community site for and by developmental biologists
the community site for and by developmental biologists
Posted by Alex Eve on September 25th, 2020
If this post causes a sense of déjà vu, it might be because you’ve read our recent articles: An Introduction to Writing Review Articles and Getting involved in peer review. For #PeerRevWeek2020, I thought I’d explore the intersection of these two topics. Although there are guides to train potential peer reviewers for reviewing research articles, the[…]
Posted by Alex Eve on May 19th, 2020
In pre-COVID19 times, back when conferences happened largely in person, early career researchers (ECRs) often asked me how they could get more direct invitations to be a reviewer. Peer review is a crucial part of the publishing ecosystem and therefore it’s not uncommon for group leaders to invite members of their lab to review articles[…]
Posted by the Node on August 1st, 2019
Publishing peer review reports In the interests of promoting transparency around the editorial process, Development will now be publishing a ‘Peer review history’ file alongside published papers, where the author has opted-in to such a file being published. All research papers submitted on or after 1 August 2019 are eligible. The file can be found on the[…]
Posted by Katherine Brown on September 5th, 2018
Last week, Development and our sister journal Journal of Cell Science signed an open letter coordinated by ASAPbio, signalling our intention to publish peer review reports alongside published papers. I’m really delighted to be making this commitment and wanted to take the opportunity to say a few words about our thinking behind this decision. So[…]
Posted by gicobellani on April 25th, 2017
In this post, I would like to introduce to “The Node” our website, reviewercredits.com, launched last July by myself and my friend Robert Fruscio. We are both physicians (I’m in critical care, he is in Gynecological oncology) and several times we chatted about peer review: we always realized how this activity is poorly recognized, despite[…]
Posted by Katherine Brown on September 21st, 2016
As you may have seen, we at Development have recently announced a change to our peer review process, introducing a cross-referee commenting step. This should be in place within the next week or two, and we’re hoping it will help us to make better decisions on papers, and to make the revision process easier for[…]
Posted by the Node on August 27th, 2015
This week the BioMedCentral blog put together a quiz to test how good you are at assessing the best course of action when faced with tricky peer review scenarios. These scenarios make for a fun exercise, but similar situations can and are encountered by you when invited to review manuscripts. However (like many other tasks that are asked from researchers)[…]
Posted by Katherine Brown on April 7th, 2015
This editorial first appeared in Development. Those of you reviewing for Development from this week onwards will notice some changes to our Reviewer Guidelines and Report Forms. After consultation with our Academic Editors, Advisory Board and the wider community, we have significantly revised the form that referees complete when reviewing a paper. We hope that these modifications will help our[…]
Posted by Katherine Brown on January 3rd, 2013
Jordan Raff’s recent Biology Open editorial on the future of publishing, posted on the Node, sparked quite a debate in the comments section. Much of that discussion focussed on perceived problems with the peer review system in scientific publishing. Particularly with the rise of journals like PLoS One and BiO, it seems that authors are[…]
