TY - JOUR
AU1 - Ross-Hellauer, Tony
AU2 - 
AB - 1 2 3 4 Background: “Open peer review” (OPR), despite being a major pillar of Open Science, has neither a standardized definition nor an agreed version 2 schema of its features and implementations. The literature reflects this, with a myriad of overlapping and often contradictory definitions. (revision) report report report While the term is used by some to refer to peer review where the 31 Aug 2017 identities of both author and reviewer are disclosed to each other, for others it signifies systems where reviewer reports are published version 1 alongside articles. For others it signifies both of these conditions, and report report report report 27 Apr 2017 for yet others it describes systems where not only “invited experts” are able to comment. For still others, it includes a variety of combinations 1. Richard Walker , Swiss Federal Institute of these and other novel methods. Methods: Recognising the absence of a consensus view on what open of Technology in Lausanne, Geneva, peer review is, this article undertakes a systematic review of Switzerland definitions of “open peer review” or “open review”, to create a corpus of 122 definitions. These definitions are then systematically analysed 2. Theodora Bloom , The BMJ, London, UK 
TI - What is open peer review? A systematic review
JF - F1000Research
DO - 10.12688/f1000research.11369.1
DA - 2017-04-27
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/unpaywall/what-is-open-peer-review-a-systematic-review-VGzAV1QofD
DP - DeepDyve
ER -