2025/01/08 by David Moher, Anna Catharina Vieira Armond · 1 voice · 1 citation
Decision Sciences · Medicine · #Ethics in Clinical Research #Health and Medical Research Impacts #Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
paper · doi:10.1080/08989621.2025.2450451
openalex publication_date 2025/01/08 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/08/01
Peer reviewers provide a critical role in helping journals keep publishing. To understand the rewards and incentives offered to peer reviewers, we assessed what journals/publishers offered to one peer reviewer in biomedicine over a 1-month period (June 2023). After receiving 88 peer reviewer invitations, we noted that incentives were minimal. They include access to journal/publisher peer review training materials, reduced author processing charges of future article submissions, and free access to the journal/publisher website. Depending on the acceptance rate (30% or 50%) of recommendations to publish the article, peer review from this sample could generate anywhere from USD 897,000 to USD 1.45 million dollars when annualized. However, little, if any of this revenue is shared directly or indirectly with peer reviewers. With almost no reciprocity in the peer review process, journals and their publishers need to promote and establish more reciprocity in a system that currently largely favors them disproportionately. This study is an anecdotal perspective of one peer reviewer's experience over a single month. While anecdotal, these findings highlight issues about the fairness and sustainability of the peer review system. We encourage others to expand on what we have done and include more empirical investigations.