From Bioblast
Jump to: navigation, search
Bioblasts - Richard Altmann and MiPArt by Odra Noel
MitoPedia         Terms and abbreviations         Concepts and methods         MitoPedia: SUIT         MiP and biochemistry         Preprints and history




F1000Research is an Open Research publishing platform for life scientists, offering immediate publication of articles and other research outputs without editorial bias. All articles benefit from transparent peer review and the inclusion of all source data. It is thus not a preprint server, but posters and slides can be published without author fees. Published posters and slides receive a DOI (digital object identifier) and become citable after a very basic check by our in-house editors.

Reference: f1000research.com

Peer review model

f1000research.com/about/policies - Section 12; downloaded 2019-03-28
All articles undergo formal peer review by invited experts who meet our criteria for reviewers; these criteria are aimed at ensuring that reviewers have sufficient expertise and qualifications to judge the content of the article and that they have no conflicts of interest.
With the exception of F1000 Faculty Reviews, peer review takes place after publication and is driven by the authors who must suggest the reviewers and who decide when and how to address any criticisms raised by the reviewers. Communication with the reviewers is done by the editorial team, on behalf of the authors.
The peer-review process is completely transparent: the reviewer names and their reports are published alongside the article, and the authors’ responses to the reviewers (or to reader comments) are also posted for readers to see.
Revisions and updates are published as new versions, with clear explanations (in an “Amendments” section) of the changes the authors made.
Usually, an article receives 2 or 3 peer review reports. The reviewers choose an approval status, which contributes to determining whether the article has ‘passed peer review’ and is indexed in bibliographic databases, such as PubMed.
12.1 Stopping Peer Review
Peer review may be discontinued on some articles that have not received sufficient peer review reports after a long period of time. As a general rule, authors may choose to stop peer review if their article has not received any reports after 6 months, or if only 1 report has been received after 9 months. In some cases, where authors have not actively pursued peer review, the F1000Research team may add an explanation on the article to alert readers that the peer review of the article is not active.
Articles with 0 or 1 report have not passed peer review and are not indexed in PubMed and other bibliographic databases; if peer review is stopped in consultation with the F1000Research team, the article (which is permanently published with a DOI and cannot be removed) can be considered equivalent to a preprint and the authors may choose to submit the manuscript to a journal for peer review and publication elsewhere (it is at the discretion of the journal editors the authors are submitting to how they consider the history of the article at F1000Research).
Peer review of these articles can be reactivated at a later stage at the authors’ request, provided the article has not been peer reviewed and published elsewhere in the meantime.
Citing a Peer Review Report
Peer review reports on F1000Research articles are published under a CC BY license. A DOI (digital object identifier) is assigned to every peer review report, so it can be cited independently from the article. The full citation can be found by clicking the Cite button next to each peer review report on the article page.
A peer review report should be cited like this:
Reviewer name(s). Peer Review Report For: Article title [version number; details of peer review status]. F1000Research Year, Volume: Publication number (doi)

MitoPedia topics: Preprints