Bias, peer review, and publishing

Lack of reviewers threatens robustness of neuroscience literature. https://www.thetransmitter.org/publishing/lack-of-reviewers-threatens-robustness-of-neuroscience-literature/. Published 2026.

Noah Haber, George C Banks, Nicholas D, PhD Bowman, et al. Registered Revisions Meta Trial Pilot Report.; 2026. https://osf.io/preprints/metaarxiv/j64ct_v1/.

Noemi Felisi, Riccardo Vecchio, Anna Odone. When peer review drags on: the harm to early career researchers. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics. 2026;11. doi:10.3389/frma.2026.1740381

Florencia Fiorentin, Diana Suarez. Gender gaps in the peer review process. Different sources in the evaluation process for the allocation of grants in Argentina. Research Evaluation. 2025;34:rvaf048. doi:10.1093/reseval/rvaf048

David Moher, Anna Catharina Vieira Armond. Publisher and journal reciprocity for peer review: Not so much. Accountability in Research. 2025;32(5):832-837. doi:10.1080/08989621.2025.2450451

NIH Center for Scientific Review. CSR Initiatives to Address Bias in Peer Review. https://public.csr.nih.gov/AboutCSR/Address-Bias-in-Peer-Review. Published 2025.

B. H. Lim, C. D’Ippoliti, M. Dominik, et al. Regional and institutional trends in assessment for academic promotion. Nature. 2025:1-10. doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08422-9

Pierre Azoulay, Wesley H. Greenblatt. Does Peer Review Penalize Scientific Risk Taking? Evidence from NIH Grant Renewals.; 2025. doi:10.3386/w33495

Transparent peer review to be extended to all of Nature’s research papers. Nature. 2025;642(8068):542-542. doi:10.1038/d41586-025-01880-9

Yueran Duan, Shahan Ali Memon, Bedoor AlShebli, Qing Guan, Petter Holme, Talal Rahwan. Postdoc publications and citations link to academic retention and faculty success. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2025;122(4):e2402053122. doi:10.1073/pnas.2402053122