Open Access News (Formerly: FOS News)

One of the claims made by traditional publishers is that the peer review process might be harmed if open access business models and practices were adopted. But as this editorial in the BMJ shows, peer review is too important to be left to publishers to manage. Formal training and academic recognition are necessary to improve the quality of peer reviewing. The former is unlikely to be provided by publishers; the latter is something over which they have little influence.

Working in a health sciences academic library, peer-review is far too important to both academics and researchers for them to let it go. And most (if not all) of the open-access archives I’ve seen provide for review anyway.