Introduction to peer reviews

Our members asked for the flexibility to register content for the reviews and discussions of scholarly content which they publish, so we extended our infrastructure to support members who post them. We support a whole host of outputs made publicly available from the peer review history, as they vary greatly based on journal. This may include referee reports, decision letter, and author response. The overall set may include outputs from the initial submission only or those from all subsequent rounds of revisions. We also allow members to register content made up of discussions surrounding a journal article after it was published (such as post-publication reviews), and peer reviews of other content types such as book chapters, preprints, or conference papers.

The following organizations consulted with us on the design and/or development of the peer review service:

  • Publons
  • PeerJ
  • F1000 Research
  • eLife
  • BioMedCentral
  • BMJ
  • Copernicus
  • EMBO
  • Nature Communications

Benefits of our custom support for peer reviews

  • It ensures that links to these documents persist over time
  • The metadata provides relevant information about the reviews whether they were part of peer review or post-publication
  • These discussions are connected to the full history of the shared research results
  • Contributors are given credit for their work
  • The citation record is clear and up-to-date.

This metadata may also support enrichment of scholarly discussion, reviewer accountability, publishing transparency, and analysis or research on peer reviews.

Specifically, registering peer reviews with us enables features such as:

  • Persistent identifiers for peer review to ensure successful links to the scholarly record over the course of time via the DOI resolver
  • Content registration for peer reviews with custom metadata that capture the process surrounding the review
  • Links to the journal articles (or other works with Crossref DOIs) that were reviewed
  • Reference linking for peer review, connecting up the scholarly record to associated literature
  • Auto-update of ORCID records to ensure that peer review contributors get credit for their work
  • Discoverability: we make the metadata available for machine and human access, across multiple interfaces (including our REST API, OAI-PMH, and Metadata Search).

Obligations and limitations for peer review registration

  1. Members depositing peer review content need to register content using the peer review metadata schema section
  2. All peer reviews must include relationship metadata linking the review with the item being reviewed (relation type isReviewOf). The item being reviewed can be any Crossref DOI, except for items pending publication. Learn more about connecting a review to the reviewed item through relations.

Other considerations:

  • References will be flagged as belonging to a peer review in our Cited-by service
  • The peer review is treated as one item only without components for its constituent parts
  • Peer review content items are not currently able to participate in Crossmark.

Membership and fees for peer review registration

Peer review posters who would like to use our registration service should apply to join as a member. We have a dedicated fee structure for peer reviews which allows for an unlimited number of reviews per associated article, combined in a single fee. Learn more about our fees.

Are you an existing Crossref member who wants to start linking up reviews? Let’s talk about getting started or migrating any existing mis-labelled content over to the dedicated peer review deposit schema section. If you’re not yet a member but want to register your reviews so they are included within Crossref infrastructure service, please contact us so we can answer any questions and get you set up.

You can register peer reviews by direct deposit of XML - learn more about markup examples for peer reviews.

Page owner: Rachael Lammey   |   Last updated 2020-April-08