It is a real shame that peer review reports were only first published relatively recently. These would have provided valuable training information as to what peer review performs. Unfortunately now, I fully expect the public peer review reports will be poorer in quality, and oftentimes superficial.
On this tool, I fully expect that it will not capture high level conceptual peer review, but could very much serve a role in identifying errors of omission from a manuscript as a checklist to improve quality (as long as this remains an author controlled process).
I will be interested to throw in some of my own published papers to see if it catches all the things I know I would have liked to improve in my papers.
On this tool, I fully expect that it will not capture high level conceptual peer review, but could very much serve a role in identifying errors of omission from a manuscript as a checklist to improve quality (as long as this remains an author controlled process).
I will be interested to throw in some of my own published papers to see if it catches all the things I know I would have liked to improve in my papers.