Interesting pointer from a #JEDI thread:
Description of a process to integrate evaluation of computational reproducibility into #PeerReview:
https://f1000research.com/articles/10-253/v2

I also like the ethos and wonder whether #PeerReview in general could learn from this?

1. Codecheckers record but don’t investigate or fix.
2. Communication between humans is key
3. Credit is given to codecheckers.
4. Computational workflows must be auditable.
5. Open by default and transitional by disposition.

#NightshiftEditor

Half of social-science studies fail replication test in years-long project

Hundreds of scientists have scrutinized thousands of research papers as part of a huge project exploring whether experiments…
#NewsBeep #News #Headlines #HumanitiesandSocialSciences #multidisciplinary #peerreview #psychology #Researchdata #Science #Scientificcommunity #World
https://www.newsbeep.com/463782/

I’m pleased to share my recent peer-review activity with Elsevier for Q1 2026.

🔬 Review History Highlights:
• 4 reviews completed
• 3 international journals
• Contributions to:
– Preventive Veterinary Medicine
– The Veterinary Journal
– Virology

I look forward to continuing to support the scientific community through rigorous, constructive, and timely reviews.

#PeerReview #ScientificResearch #VeterinaryMedicine #Virology #Elsevier #AcademicService

Our new 📄 in Current Alzheimer Research looks at a strange, and worrying, phenomenon in scientific writing: tortured phrases. Instead of blood-brain barrier, some papers use bizarre alternatives like blood-brain obstruction or blood-cerebrum boundary.

 https://doi.org/10.2174/0115672050460224260206052444

These are not just language errors, they can signal deeper issues such as weak #PeerReview or even #PaperMills.

#OpenScience #ResearchIntegrity #Bibliometrics #Neuroethics #AcademicPublishing

I just learned about ORE, thanks to Khrys'presso.

I'm really curious about open peer review and more generally about their publishing model.

[ I also wish such a platform was built around a distributed model like ActivityPub. ]

#DiamondOA #PeerReview

Six #ASAPbio fellows asked four #LLMs to describe the strengths and weaknesses of #preprints. Here are the results.
https://asapbio.org/interim-findings-from-an-investigation-into-llm-responses-about-preprints-a-2025-asapbio-fellows-project/

The same fellows asked the same LLMs to ingest six preprints and their #PeerReviewed counterparts, and compare them for quality and rigor. Good question. But they've not yet analyzed the data and will presumably report soon.

PS: I'm interested in a related question. When LLMs answer research questions, do they treat on-topic preprints and on-topic postprints (peer-reviewed articles) as equivalent in weight or credibility? If not, how exactly do they take any differences into account?

#AI #PeerReview #ScholComm

Wissenschaft in der heutigen Zeit

https://venera.social/display/85a863ed-1469-cace-3837-522728097418

Another #PeerReview done. Re-review.

Manuscript c5,500 words
Review c1,900 words
2.5hrs

In applied research it is common that standard solutions, protocols, analyses, and interpretations are used for many parts of a project. While this can lead to Frankensteinian combinations of toolsets*, there is something to be said for efficiency.

But using things that are considerably worse or demonstrably incorrect, without justification or explanation, does not work at all.

* I am as guilty as anyone!

"The Secret Editor: The Brutal Truth About Peer Review, Profit, and “Bonkers” Publishing"

Interesting video mentioned in Chris Leonard's Scalene newsletter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mb9S20sWtOI

#research #peerReview