Table 3. Comparative assessment of future peer review models in relation to open access publishing features.
| Future peer review models | Openness | Anonymity | Accountability | Bias | Time | Incentive |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Review content made public | Editors and reviewers disclosed to authors | Author-reviewer interaction transparent | Editorial decisions made public | Reviewing time shortened | Recognition or credit given to reviewers | |
| Reviewers and authors known | Constructive criticisms increased | Delays or new reviews avoided | ||||
| 1) Reddit model | Yes | Yes | ||||
| : Platform for comments and original or linked content | ||||||
| 2) Stack exchange model | Yes | Yes | Yes | |||
| : Network of websites of question and answer sites | ||||||
| 3) Amazon model | Yes | |||||
| : Model for posting reviews of published materials | ||||||
| 4) GitHub model | Yes | Yes | ||||
| : Open-source distributed version control system with features transferable to peer-review system | ||||||
| 5) Hypothesis model | Yes | Yes | ||||
| : Web annotation tool for interactive education and collection of peer perspectives | ||||||
| 6) Wikipedia model | Yes | Yes | ||||
| : Collaborative authoring and review system | ||||||
| 7) Blockchain model | Yes | Yes | ||||
| : Technology for possibly creating tokenized peer review system | ||||||
| 8) AI-assisted peer review | Yes | |||||
| : Used for recognizing images, recommending content, detecting fraud, evaluating teaching and assessment, or detecting plagiarism; requires human final judgement | ||||||
| 9) Hybrid peer review platform | Yes | Yes | ||||
| : Consists of harmonization, certification, and incentivization |
Blanks: No basis for making a present assessment.