Written by CERN, OPERAS and the European Commission
Peer review is one of the cornerstones of scientific communication, being, above all, a quality control process in which experts evaluate the work of others, with the aim of assessing the quality, rigor, and reliability of the research. Reviewers are asked to verify the claims, methodology, and data. In this process, the quality of the argumentation is evaluated, the novelty of the results is analyzed, and the contribution to the scientific field is critically examined. Furthermore, peer review is expected to help authors improve their work following constructive comments and peer assessment, contributing to the maintenance of high academic standards and the advancement of science and knowledge.
Open Research Europe is based on these principles through an open peer review process grounded in the Publish, Review, Curate model. Instead of viewing peer review as a private exchange, as is common in traditional publishing, ORE makes expert evaluation an open, collaborative, and transparent part of scientific communication.
In ORE, authors decide when their results are ready to receive public comments and constructive criticism. After a series of formal checks, the article is published before revisions are requested and carried out. The revisions, subsequently made available openly, allow authors to engage in a free dialogue with reviewers, explaining how they considered their observations and comments, or why they chose not to follow them. Revisions help authors produce a revised, improved, and validated version of their article. Furthermore, reviewers receive full recognition for their contribution to the article, and the revisions become, in their own right, citable scientific results. At the end of the process, a complete, open, and faithful record of the scientific discussion is maintained, in accordance with the principles of open science.
Open peer review also brings benefits to readers. By providing access to reviewers' reports, authors' responses, and revised versions, ORE allows readers to understand how a particular investigation was evaluated, providing greater confidence in the published scientific record and a deeper understanding of the evidence and reasoning underlying the final publication. Furthermore, it highlights the collaborative nature of research and how it results from a continuous cycle of incremental improvement.
By combining rapid dissemination with transparent peer review, ORE avoids lengthy submission-rejection-resubmission cycles, improves accountability, and makes it easier to identify potential reviewer biases. The openness of the process preserves the essential role of peer review, while simultaneously making it visible and recognizing the contribution of all those involved in improving research, as well as reinforcing confidence in scientific output.
Adapted from https://open-research-europe.ec.europa.eu/blog/how-open-peer-review-improves-scholarly-publication
