{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,4,1]],"date-time":"2026-04-01T02:44:36Z","timestamp":1775011476384,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":36,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2022,6,11]],"date-time":"2022-06-11T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1654905600000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2022,6,11]],"date-time":"2022-06-11T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1654905600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["BMC Res Notes"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2022,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>The rising rate of preprints and publications, combined with persistent inadequate reporting practices and problems with study design and execution, have strained the traditional peer review system. Automated screening tools could potentially enhance peer review by helping authors, journal editors, and reviewers to identify beneficial practices and common problems in preprints or submitted manuscripts. Tools can screen many papers quickly, and may be particularly helpful in assessing compliance with journal policies and with straightforward items in reporting guidelines. However, existing tools cannot understand or interpret the paper in the context of the scientific literature. Tools cannot yet determine whether the methods used are suitable to answer the research question, or whether the data support the authors\u2019 conclusions. Editors and peer reviewers are essential for assessing journal fit and the overall quality of a paper, including the experimental design, the soundness of the study\u2019s conclusions, potential impact and innovation. Automated screening tools cannot replace peer review, but may aid authors, reviewers, and editors in improving scientific papers.\u00a0Strategies for responsible use of automated tools in peer review may include setting performance criteria for tools, transparently reporting tool performance and use, and training users to interpret reports.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1186\/s13104-022-06080-6","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2022,6,11]],"date-time":"2022-06-11T11:03:04Z","timestamp":1654945384000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":62,"title":["Is the future of peer review automated?"],"prefix":"10.1186","volume":"15","author":[{"given":"Robert","family":"Schulz","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Adrian","family":"Barnett","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Ren\u00e9","family":"Bernard","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Nicholas J. L.","family":"Brown","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Jennifer A.","family":"Byrne","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Peter","family":"Eckmann","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Ma\u0142gorzata A.","family":"Gazda","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Halil","family":"Kilicoglu","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Eric M.","family":"Prager","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Maia","family":"Salholz-Hillel","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Gerben","family":"ter Riet","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Timothy","family":"Vines","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Colby J.","family":"Vorland","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Han","family":"Zhuang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"Anita","family":"Bandrowski","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-7490-2600","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Tracey L.","family":"Weissgerber","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2022,6,11]]},"reference":[{"key":"6080_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2","DOI":"10.1002\/asi.22784","volume":"64","author":"CJ Lee","year":"2013","unstructured":"Lee CJ, Sugimoto CR, Zhang G, Cronin B. Bias in peer review. J Am Soc Inf Sci Tec. 2013;64:2\u201317. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/asi.22784.","journal-title":"J Am Soc Inf Sci Tec"},{"key":"6080_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/eci.13190","volume":"50","author":"CJ Vorland","year":"2020","unstructured":"Vorland CJ, Brown AW, Ejima K, Mayo-Wilson E, Valdez D, Allison DB. Toward fulfilling the aspirational goal of science as self-correcting: a call for editorial courage and diligence for error correction. Eur J Clin Invest. 2020;50: e13190. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/eci.13190.","journal-title":"Eur J Clin Invest"},{"key":"6080_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pbio.3001572","volume":"20","author":"L Besan\u00e7on","year":"2022","unstructured":"Besan\u00e7on L, Bik E, Heathers J, Meyerowitz-Katz G. Correction of scientific literature: too little, too late! PLoS Biol. 2022;20: e3001572. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pbio.3001572.","journal-title":"PLoS Biol"},{"key":"6080_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"495","DOI":"10.2147\/JMDH.S155103","volume":"11","author":"Y Jin","year":"2018","unstructured":"Jin Y, Sanger N, Shams I, Luo C, Shahid H, Li G, et al. Does the medical literature remain inadequately described despite having reporting guidelines for 21 years?\u2014a systematic review of reviews: an update. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2018;11:495\u2013510. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2147\/JMDH.S155103.","journal-title":"J Multidiscip Healthc"},{"key":"6080_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1101\/2021.07.20.21260565","author":"R Schulz","year":"2021","unstructured":"Schulz R, Langen G, Prill R, Cassel M, Weissgerber T. The devil is in the details: reporting and transparent research practices in sports medicine and orthopedic clinical trials. medRxiv. 2021. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1101\/2021.07.20.21260565.","journal-title":"medRxiv"},{"key":"6080_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmj.j2490","volume":"357","author":"A Dechartres","year":"2017","unstructured":"Dechartres A, Trinquart L, Atal I, Moher D, Dickersin K, Boutron I, et al. Evolution of poor reporting and inadequate methods over time in 20 920 randomised controlled trials included in Cochrane reviews: research on research study. BMJ. 2017;357: j2490. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmj.j2490.","journal-title":"BMJ"},{"key":"6080_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1205","DOI":"10.3758\/s13428-015-0664-2","volume":"48","author":"MB Nuijten","year":"2016","unstructured":"Nuijten MB, Hartgerink CHJ, van Assen MALM, Epskamp S, Wicherts JM. The prevalence of statistical reporting errors in psychology (1985\u20132013). Behav Res Methods. 2016;48:1205\u201326. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3758\/s13428-015-0664-2.","journal-title":"Behav Res Methods"},{"key":"6080_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"363","DOI":"10.1177\/1948550616673876","volume":"8","author":"NJL Brown","year":"2017","unstructured":"Brown NJL, Heathers JAJ. The GRIM Test. Soc Psychol Personal Sci. 2017;8:363\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1177\/1948550616673876.","journal-title":"Soc Psychol Personal Sci"},{"key":"6080_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"339","DOI":"10.1007\/s11192-018-2969-2","volume":"118","author":"SPJM Horbach","year":"2019","unstructured":"Horbach SPJM, Halffman W. The ability of different peer review procedures to flag problematic publications. Scientometrics. 2019;118:339\u201373. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11192-018-2969-2.","journal-title":"Scientometrics"},{"key":"6080_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1136\/bmjopen-2018-026589","volume":"9","author":"D Blanco","year":"2019","unstructured":"Blanco D, Altman D, Moher D, Boutron I, Kirkham JJ, Cobo E. Scoping review on interventions to improve adherence to reporting guidelines in health research. BMJ Open. 2019;9: e026589. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1136\/bmjopen-2018-026589.","journal-title":"BMJ Open"},{"key":"6080_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"128","DOI":"10.1186\/s12916-014-0128-z","volume":"12","author":"J Patel","year":"2014","unstructured":"Patel J. Why training and specialization is needed for peer review: a case study of peer review for randomized controlled trials. BMC Med. 2014;12:128. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12916-014-0128-z.","journal-title":"BMC Med"},{"key":"6080_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1087\/20100103","author":"HY ZHANG","year":"2010","unstructured":"ZHANG HY. Crosscheck: an effective tool for detecting plagiarism. Learn Publ. 2010. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1087\/20100103.","journal-title":"Learn Publ"},{"key":"6080_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7554\/eLife.45133","author":"RJ Abdill","year":"2019","unstructured":"Abdill RJ, Blekhman R. Tracking the popularity and outcomes of all bioRxiv preprints. Elife. 2019. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7554\/eLife.45133.","journal-title":"Elife"},{"key":"6080_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"20201","DOI":"10.11613\/BM.2021.020201","volume":"31","author":"M Mali\u010dki","year":"2021","unstructured":"Mali\u010dki M, Costello J, Alperin JP, Maggio LA. Analysis of single comments left for bioRxiv preprints till september 2019. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2021;31:20201. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.11613\/BM.2021.020201.","journal-title":"Biochem Med (Zagreb)"},{"key":"6080_CR15","unstructured":"Journal of Experimental Social Psychology. JESP piloting the use of statcheck. 2017. https:\/\/www.journals.elsevier.com\/journal-of-experimental-social-psychology\/news\/jesp-piloting-the-use-of-statcheck."},{"key":"6080_CR16","unstructured":"Society for Scholarly Publishing, SSP. SciScore to launch a pilot with the american association for cancer research to help authors improve rigor and reproducibility in their published work. 2020. https:\/\/www.sspnet.org\/community\/news\/sciscore-to-launch-a-pilot-with-the-american-association-for-cancer-research-to-help-authors-improve-rigor-and-reproducibility-in-their-published-work\/. Accessed 29 Mar 2022."},{"key":"6080_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"6","DOI":"10.1038\/s41591-020-01203-7","volume":"27","author":"T Weissgerber","year":"2021","unstructured":"Weissgerber T, Riedel N, Kilicoglu H, Labb\u00e9 C, Eckmann P, ter Riet G, et al. Automated screening of COVID-19 preprints: can we help authors to improve transparency and reproducibility? Nat Med. 2021;27:6\u20137. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/s41591-020-01203-7.","journal-title":"Nat Med"},{"key":"6080_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.isci.2020.101698","author":"J Menke","year":"2020","unstructured":"Menke J, Roelandse M, Ozyurt B, Martone M, Bandrowski A. The rigor and transparency index quality metric for assessing biological and medical science methods. iScience. 2020. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.isci.2020.101698.","journal-title":"iScience"},{"key":"6080_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"42","DOI":"10.5334\/dsj-2020-042","volume":"19","author":"N Riedel","year":"2020","unstructured":"Riedel N, Kip M, Bobrov E. ODDPub\u2014a text-mining algorithm to detect data sharing in biomedical publications. Data Sci J. 2020;19:42. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5334\/dsj-2020-042.","journal-title":"Data Sci J"},{"key":"6080_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"855","DOI":"10.1093\/jamia\/ocy038","volume":"25","author":"H Kilicoglu","year":"2018","unstructured":"Kilicoglu H, Rosemblat G, Malicki M, ter Riet G. Automatic recognition of self-acknowledged limitations in clinical research literature. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25:855\u201361. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/jamia\/ocy038.","journal-title":"J Am Med Inform Assoc"},{"key":"6080_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1101\/2022.03.14.484206","author":"N Riedel","year":"2022","unstructured":"Riedel N, Schulz R, Kazezian V, Weissgerber T. Replacing bar graphs of continuous data with more informative graphics: are we making progress? bioRxiv. 2022. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1101\/2022.03.14.484206.","journal-title":"bioRxiv"},{"key":"6080_CR22","unstructured":"eLife. Jetfighter: towards figure accuracy and accessibility. 2019. https:\/\/elifesciences.org\/labs\/c2292989\/jetfighter-towards-figure-accuracy-and-accessibility. Accessed 29 Mar 2022."},{"key":"6080_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0213266","volume":"14","author":"C Labb\u00e9","year":"2019","unstructured":"Labb\u00e9 C, Grima N, Gautier T, Favier B, Byrne JA. Semi-automated fact-checking of nucleotide sequence reagents in biomedical research publications: the seek & blastn tool. PLoS ONE. 2019;14: e0213266. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0213266.","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"key":"6080_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s41073-018-0051-5","author":"SP Horbach","year":"2018","unstructured":"Horbach SP, Halffman W. The changing forms and expectations of peer review. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2018. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s41073-018-0051-5.","journal-title":"Res Integr Peer Rev"},{"key":"6080_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1000251","volume":"7","author":"KF Schulz","year":"2010","unstructured":"Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. Consort 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. PLoS Med. 2010;7: e1000251. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pmed.1000251.","journal-title":"PLoS Med"},{"key":"6080_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pmed.1003583","volume":"18","author":"MJ Page","year":"2021","unstructured":"Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2021;18: e1003583. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pmed.1003583.","journal-title":"PLoS Med"},{"key":"6080_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pbio.3000411","author":"N Percie du Sert","year":"2020","unstructured":"Percie du Sert N, Ahluwalia A, Alam S, Avey MT, Baker M, Browne WJ, et al. Reporting animal research: explanation and elaboration for the ARRIVE guidelines 2.0. PLoS Biol. 2020. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pbio.3000411.","journal-title":"PLoS Biol"},{"key":"6080_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.7554\/eLife.36163","author":"TL Weissgerber","year":"2018","unstructured":"Weissgerber TL, Garcia-Valencia O, Garovic VD, Milic NM, Winham SJ. Why we need to report more than \u201cData were analyzed by t-tests or ANOVA.\u201d Elife. 2018. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.7554\/eLife.36163.","journal-title":"Elife"},{"key":"6080_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"671","DOI":"10.1042\/CS20201573","volume":"135","author":"V Pavlovic","year":"2021","unstructured":"Pavlovic V, Weissgerber T, Stanisavljevic D, Pekmezovic T, Milicevic O, Lazovic JM, et al. How accurate are citations of frequently cited papers in biomedical literature? Clin Sci (Lond). 2021;135:671\u201381. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1042\/CS20201573.","journal-title":"Clin Sci (Lond)"},{"key":"6080_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pbio.3001107","volume":"19","author":"S Serghiou","year":"2021","unstructured":"Serghiou S, Contopoulos-Ioannidis DG, Boyack KW, Riedel N, Wallach JD, Ioannidis JPA. Assessment of transparency indicators across the biomedical literature: how open is open? PLoS Biol. 2021;19: e3001107. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pbio.3001107.","journal-title":"PLoS Biol"},{"key":"6080_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"954","DOI":"10.1007\/s12094-017-1817-9","volume":"20","author":"A Carmona-Bayonas","year":"2018","unstructured":"Carmona-Bayonas A, Jimenez-Fonseca P, Fern\u00e1ndez-Somoano A, \u00c1lvarez-Mance\u00f1ido F, Casta\u00f1\u00f3n E, Custodio A, et al. Top ten errors of statistical analysis in observational studies for cancer research. Clin Transl Oncol. 2018;20:954\u201365. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s12094-017-1817-9.","journal-title":"Clin Transl Oncol"},{"key":"6080_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1186\/s12910-021-00664-w","author":"K Asplund","year":"2021","unstructured":"Asplund K, Hulter \u00c5K. Reporting ethical approval in health and social science articles: an audit of adherence to GDPR and national legislation. BMC Med Ethics. 2021. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s12910-021-00664-w.","journal-title":"BMC Med Ethics"},{"key":"6080_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"550","DOI":"10.1016\/S0140-6736(18)32995-7","volume":"393","author":"CR Sugimoto","year":"2019","unstructured":"Sugimoto CR, Ahn Y-Y, Smith E, Macaluso B, Larivi\u00e8re V. Factors affecting sex-related reporting in medical research: a cross-disciplinary bibliometric analysis. The Lancet. 2019;393:550\u20139. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/S0140-6736(18)32995-7.","journal-title":"The Lancet"},{"key":"6080_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1371\/journal.pone.0073623","volume":"8","author":"G Ter Riet","year":"2013","unstructured":"Ter Riet G, Chesley P, Gross AG, Siebeling L, Muggensturm P, Heller N, et al. All that glitters isn\u2019t gold: a survey on acknowledgment of limitations in biomedical studies. PLoS ONE. 2013;8: e73623. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1371\/journal.pone.0073623.","journal-title":"PLoS ONE"},{"key":"6080_CR35","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"633","DOI":"10.1007\/s11192-017-2310-5","volume":"113","author":"J Huisman","year":"2017","unstructured":"Huisman J, Smits J. Duration and quality of the peer review process: the author\u2019s perspective. Scientometrics. 2017;113:633\u201350. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s11192-017-2310-5.","journal-title":"Scientometrics"},{"key":"6080_CR36","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"12","DOI":"10.1186\/s41073-019-0069-3","volume":"4","author":"K Hair","year":"2019","unstructured":"Hair K, Macleod MR, Sena ES. A randomised controlled trial of an intervention to improve compliance with the ARRIVE guidelines (IICARus). Res Integr Peer Rev. 2019;4:12. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s41073-019-0069-3.","journal-title":"Res Integr Peer Rev"}],"container-title":["BMC Research Notes"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s13104-022-06080-6.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1186\/s13104-022-06080-6\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1186\/s13104-022-06080-6.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2022,6,11]],"date-time":"2022-06-11T11:13:08Z","timestamp":1654945988000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/bmcresnotes.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s13104-022-06080-6"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2022,6,11]]},"references-count":36,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2022,12]]}},"alternative-id":["6080"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1186\/s13104-022-06080-6","relation":{},"ISSN":["1756-0500"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1756-0500","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2022,6,11]]},"assertion":[{"value":"4 April 2022","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"18 May 2022","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"11 June 2022","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethical approval and consent to participate"}},{"value":"Not applicable.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Consent for publication"}},{"value":"AB is a cofounder and CEO of SciCrunch Inc, the company that created SciScore to serve journals in compliance with the MDAR standard. TV is the founder and Director of DataSeer Research Data Services Ltd.","order":4,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"203"}}