Abstract
Publication forms the core structure supporting the development and transmission of scientific knowledge. For this reason, it is essential that the highest standards of quality control be maintained, in particular to ensure that the information being transmitted allows reproducible replication of the described experiments, and that the interpretation of the results is sound. Quality control has traditionally involved editorial decisions based on anonymous pre-publication peer review. Post-publication review of individual articles took the lesser role since it did not feed directly back to the original literature. Rapid advances in computer and communications technologies over the last thirty years have revolutionized scientific publication, and the role and scope of post-publication review has greatly expanded. This perspective examines the ways in which pre- and post-publication peer review influence the scientific literature, and in particular how they might best be redrawn to deal with the twin problems of scientific non-reproducibility and fraud increasingly encountered at the frontiers of science.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Article number | 198 |
| Journal | Frontiers in Genetics |
| Volume | 6 |
| Issue number | JUN |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2015 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Fraudulent data
- Internet publication
- Post-publication review
- Scientific misconduct
- Scientific reproducibility
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Genetics
- Molecular Medicine
- Genetics(clinical)
Cite this
Redrawing the frontiers in the age of post-publication review. / Galbraith, David W.
In: Frontiers in Genetics, Vol. 6, No. JUN, 198, 2015.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Redrawing the frontiers in the age of post-publication review
AU - Galbraith, David W
PY - 2015
Y1 - 2015
N2 - Publication forms the core structure supporting the development and transmission of scientific knowledge. For this reason, it is essential that the highest standards of quality control be maintained, in particular to ensure that the information being transmitted allows reproducible replication of the described experiments, and that the interpretation of the results is sound. Quality control has traditionally involved editorial decisions based on anonymous pre-publication peer review. Post-publication review of individual articles took the lesser role since it did not feed directly back to the original literature. Rapid advances in computer and communications technologies over the last thirty years have revolutionized scientific publication, and the role and scope of post-publication review has greatly expanded. This perspective examines the ways in which pre- and post-publication peer review influence the scientific literature, and in particular how they might best be redrawn to deal with the twin problems of scientific non-reproducibility and fraud increasingly encountered at the frontiers of science.
AB - Publication forms the core structure supporting the development and transmission of scientific knowledge. For this reason, it is essential that the highest standards of quality control be maintained, in particular to ensure that the information being transmitted allows reproducible replication of the described experiments, and that the interpretation of the results is sound. Quality control has traditionally involved editorial decisions based on anonymous pre-publication peer review. Post-publication review of individual articles took the lesser role since it did not feed directly back to the original literature. Rapid advances in computer and communications technologies over the last thirty years have revolutionized scientific publication, and the role and scope of post-publication review has greatly expanded. This perspective examines the ways in which pre- and post-publication peer review influence the scientific literature, and in particular how they might best be redrawn to deal with the twin problems of scientific non-reproducibility and fraud increasingly encountered at the frontiers of science.
KW - Fraudulent data
KW - Internet publication
KW - Post-publication review
KW - Scientific misconduct
KW - Scientific reproducibility
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84940105997&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84940105997&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3389/fgene.2015.00198
DO - 10.3389/fgene.2015.00198
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84940105997
VL - 6
JO - Frontiers in Genetics
JF - Frontiers in Genetics
SN - 1664-8021
IS - JUN
M1 - 198
ER -