Tenth international congress on peer review and scientific publication

John P A Ioannidis, professor1 2,
Michael Berkwits, former JAMA deputy editor3,
Annette Flanagin, executive managing editor4,
Theodora Bloom, executive editor5

¹Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA

²Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA

³Chicago, Illinois, USA

⁴JAMA and the JAMA Network, Chicago, Illinois, USA

⁵The BMJ, London, UK

Correspondence to: A Flanagin annette.flanagin{at}jamanetwork.org

In September 2023, we announced the 10th international congress on peer review and scientific publication, to be held in Chicago, Illinois, on 3-5 September 2025.1 We now officially call for abstract submissions.

The aim of the congress continues to be inspired by the original goal of the inaugural session in 19892,3: to encourage research into the quality and credibility of peer review and scientific publication and to further the evidence base on which scientists can improve the conduct, reporting, and dissemination of scientific research. Nearly everything else has changed around that mission, as we recently described.1 The effects of artificial intelligence (AI) and large language model (LLM) technologies are currently shaping an unpredictable landscape. The rise of mega-journals,4 challenges to reproducibility,5 ever evolving incentives for publication,6,7 old and new types of misconduct,8 9 10 11 and countless other developments accompany evolving shifts in the scientific environment. These shifts are not well covered by existing scholarly publication practices and policies. Such evolving changes warrant empirical descriptions and investigation into their effects and possible adverse effects on the scientific enterprise.

As with all previous congresses, next year’s event will feature three days of presentations of original research about these and other topics that are vital to the processes, policies, problems, and innovations of peer review, scientific publication, and research dissemination. The congress programme will be largely determined by the abstracts we receive from researchers, representing the current and evolving interests and work of global scientific communities. We encourage new ideas and rigorous evaluations of both old and new processes, and give priority to novel, data driven studies. We also encourage studies that build on previous related research. We are less interested in previously published studies unless there are new insights derived from new unpublished analyses.

The box gives examples of topics of interest, and we will consider any novel research relevant to the funding, conduct, editorial and peer review, reporting, analysis and interpretation, and dissemination of scientific and scholarly information. We have a continued special interest in studies of bias of all sorts and how biases can be identified and managed, ranging from methodological and analytical biases in reports of research to concerns about diversity, inclusion, and representativeness of research participants, authors, peer reviewers, and editors. We are also interested in studies that evaluate if and how AI and LLM technologies have altered the landscape of science and publishing since their public upsurge just after the last congress in 2022.12,13 The world was emerging from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic then, and we proposed that the contentious and challenging interface between science, society, and policy created an opportune time to test, challenge, and improve the standards of peer review and scientific publication.14 The promise and perils of science and the broader society that supports it seem no less volatile now, if for different reasons, and we again hope that the evolution of technologies and opportunities will lead to novel research that can be presented and discussed during the 10th congress and that the gatekeepers and systems of scientific production and dissemination will be even more receptive to informed change.

We will consider a broad range of study designs but give preference to well developed studies with more generalisable results (eg, prospective, multiyear trials and controlled studies from collaborative researchers, journals, publishers, funders, and information disseminators). Retrospective studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, bibliometric and other data analyses, surveys, modelling studies, and other types of studies will also be considered. Abstracts describing non-systematic narrative reviews, recommendations, or opinions will not be considered.

We particularly encourage interdisciplinary research and work that aims to provide valuable insights across diverse scientific fields, including (but not limited to) biomedicine, health and life sciences, psychology, applied sciences, basic sciences, physical and chemical sciences, mathematics, computer sciences, engineering, economics, and social sciences. Work in new and emerging disciplines on technologies and interventions related to publication systems and peer review are also welcome.

Presenters and attendees typically include editors and publishers of scientific peer reviewed journals, researchers, funders, bibliometric and informatics experts, information innovators, librarians, journalists, policy makers, ethicists, scientific information producers and disseminators, and anyone interested in the progress of the scientific information enterprise and the quality of scientific evidence across all scientific and scholarly disciplines. Everyone is invited to submit research for consideration and to attend.

The abstract submission site will open on 1 December 2024, and the deadline for submission is 31 January 2025. Instructions for preparing and submitting abstracts and programmes and abstracts of research presented at the previous congresses9 are available on the peer review congress website.15 Additional information and future announcements will be available on the website, via email alerts that can be signed up for on the site, and the Peer Review Congress social media posts.

The peer review congress is organised by us with support from JAMA and the JAMA Network, The BMJ, and the Meta Research Innovation Center at Stanford (METRICS) and is supported by associate directors and an advisory board of leaders in research and publication who represent a wide variety of scientific disciplines.16

We are excited to receive abstracts for consideration for the 10th international congress on peer review and scientific publication.

Topics of interest for the 10th international congress on peer review and scientific publication*

Bias

Efforts to avoid, manage, or account for bias in research methods, design, conduct, analysis, and reporting and interpretation
Publication and reporting bias
Bias on the part of researchers, authors, reviewers, editors, funders, commentators, influencers, disseminators, and consumers of scientific information
Interventions to address gender, race and ethnicity, geographical location, career stage, and discipline biases in peer review, publication, research dissemination, and impact
Improving and measuring diversity, equity, and inclusion of authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial board members
Motivational factors for bias related to rewards and incentives
New forms of bias introduced by wider use of large language models and other forms of artificial intelligence (AI)

Editorial and peer review decision making

Assessment and testing of models of peer review and editorial decision making and workflows used by journals, publishers, funders, and research disseminators
Evaluations of the quality, validity, and practicality of peer review and editorial decision making
Challenges, new biases, and opportunities with mega-journals
Assessment of practices related to publication of special issues with guest editors
Economic and systemic evaluations of peer review technology and workflows and the related publishing business sector
Methods for ascertaining use of large language models and other forms of AI in authoring and peer review of scientific papers
AI in peer review and editorial decision making
Quality assurance for reviewers, editors, and funders
Editorial policies and responsibilities
Editorial freedom and integrity
Peer review of grant proposals
Peer review of content for meetings
Editorial handling of science journalism
Role of journals as publishing venues v peer review venues
Covid-19 pandemic and post-pandemic effects

Research and publication integrity and ethics

Ethical concerns for researchers, authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, and funders
Authorship, contributorship, accountability, and responsibility for published material
Conflicts of interest (financial and nonfinancial)
Research and publication misconduct
Editorial nepotism or favouritism
Paper mills
Citation cartels, citejacking, and other manipulation of citations
Conflicts of interest among those who critique or criticise published research and researchers
Ethical review and approval of studies
Confidentiality considerations
Rights of research participants in scientific publication
Effects of funding and sponsorship on research and publication
Influence of external stakeholders: funders, journal owners, advertisers/sponsors, libraries, legal representatives, news media, social media, fact checkers, technology companies, and others
Tools and software to detect wrongdoing, such as duplication, fraudulent manuscripts and reviewers, image manipulation, and submissions from paper mills
Corrections and retractions
Legal issues in peer review and correction of the literature
Evaluations of censorship in science
Intrusion of political and ideological agendas in scientific publishing
Science and scientific publication under authoritarian regimes

Improving research design, conduct, and reporting

Effectiveness of guidelines and standards designed to improve the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of scientific studies
Evaluations of the methodological rigour of published information
Data sharing, transparency, reliability, and access
Research reanalysis, reproducibility, and replicability
Approaches for efficient and effective correction of errors
Curtailing citation and continued spread of retracted science
Innovations in best, fit-for-purpose methods and statistics, and ways to improve their appropriate use
Implementations of AI and related tools to improve research design, conduct, and reporting
Innovations to improve data and scientific display
Quality and reliability of data presentation and scientific images
Standards for multimedia and new content models for dissemination of science
Quality and effectiveness of new formats for scientific articles
Fixed articles v evolving versions and innovations to support updating of scientific articles and reviews

Models for peer review and scientific publication

Single anonymous, double anonymous, collaborative, and open peer review
Pre-study conduct peer review
Open and public access
Embargoes
Preprints and prepublication posting and release of information
Prospective registration of research
Post-publication review, communications, and influence
Engaging statistical and other technical expertise in peer review
Evaluations of reward systems for authors, reviewers, and editors
Approaches to improve diversity, equity, and inclusion in peer review and publication
Innovations to address reviewer fatigue
Scientific information in multimedia and new media
Publication and performance metrics and usage statistics
Financial and economic models of peer reviewed publication
Quality and influence of advertising and sponsored publication
Quality and effectiveness of content tagging, markup, and linking
Use of AI and software to improve peer review, decision making, and dissemination of science
Practices of opportunistic, predatory, and pirate operators
Threats to scientific publication
The future of scientific publication

Dissemination of scientific and scholarly information

New technologies and methods for improving the quality and efficiency of, and equitable access to, scientific information
Novel mechanisms, formats, and platforms to disseminate science
Funding and reward systems for science and scientific publication
Use of bibliometrics and alternative metrics to evaluate the quality and equitable dissemination of published science
Best practices for corrections and retracting fraudulent articles
Comparisons of and lessons from various scientific disciplines
Mapping of scientific methods and reporting practices and of meta-research across disciplines
Use and effects of social media
Misinformation and disinformation
Reporting, publishing, disseminating, and accessing science in emergency situations (pandemics, natural disasters, political turmoil, wars)

Footnotes

This article is being published simultaneously in The BMJ and JAMA.
Competing interests: We have read and understood BMJ policy on declaration of interests and declare that all authors serve as directors of the peer review congress. AF is an unpaid board member for STM: International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers. TB is a founder of medRxiv, a member of the board of managers of American Institute of Physics Publishing, and on the governance council of the Canadian Medical Association Journal.
Provenance and peer review: Commissioned; not externally peer reviewed.

Source link