Table 1.

The main problems with the current review system and some of their potential solutions

Category	Problems	Potential Solution	Advantages	Disadvantages
Quality	Lack of reviewers	Monetary compensation	More reward	Only wealthy publishers can afford it
		Preprint peer review	Large public reviewer pool Timely dissemination Less publication bias	Rare engagement of the public Misinformation from preprints Unclear impact of bias
		Improved recruitment	Various resources Crowdsourcing methods	Need validation of benefits
		AI-assisted reviews	Massive workforce	Questionable quality Requires human validation
	Lack of qualified reviewers	Reviewer training	Better preparation Standardization	Requires resources Standardization
	Insufficient scrutiny fueling irreproducibility	More reviewers Open and transparent reviews	More thorough review More information Better documentation	Slower process Variable implementation Hard to reject papers
	Increased specialization	Checklists (Ensure that important topics are covered)	Standardization	Unproven effectiveness
		Signed reviews (one can see which specialization was covered in the review)	Higher quality Fewer unprofessional comments Conflicts identified	Less critical reviews Fear of retaliation Actual retaliation
Predatory journals	No review or rudimentary review	Transparent editorial process + Signed reviews, Open and transparent reviews	Clarity how decisions are made	Uncertainty about best practices
Biases	Bias for or against authors, topics, methods, groups, institutions, countries, arguments, ideas	Double-blind peer review	Reduced biases	Possibly more critical reviews Often hard to achieve
		Publishing reviews + Signed reviews, Open and transparent reviews, Reviewer training	More transparency	Possibly less critical reviews
Poor reliability	Limited agreement and frequent disagreement between reviewers	Focus revisions on points where reviewers agree, and where they have special expertise	Higher reliability	Difficulty understanding what drives (dis)agreement between reviewers
	Lack of evidence for deciding how to improve the system	Empirical test and randomized trials	More rigorous evidence	Relatively few examples Difficult to implement Not easy to perform in real world

Listed advantages and disadvantages correspond to the solutions in bold.