On improving the sustainability of peer review

Daniel Routledge · Nonia Pariente

10 citations0/0 files storedPLoS Biology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Publishing and Scholarly Communication Academic Writing and Publishing Academic Publishing and Open Access

Abstract

The term "reviewer fatigue" has become only too familiar in scientific publishing. How can we ease the burden on reviewers to make the peer review system more sustainable, while streamlining the publication process for authors?

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.

References

2024The strain on scientific publishing 2023Artificial intelligence to support publishing and peer review: A summary and review 2017Recruitment of reviewers is becoming harder at some journals: a test of the influence of reviewer fatigue at six journals in ecology and evolution 2025The present and future of peer review: Ideas, interventions, and evidence 2018Publons' Global State Of Peer Review 2018 2016Life Science’s Average Publishable Unit (APU) Has Increased over the Past Two Decades 2022Should peer reviewers be paid to review academic papers?2021The $450 question: Should journals pay peer reviewers?

Cited by

2026Screening, sorting, and the feedback cycles that imperil peer review

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.