Table 3. Peer reviewer focussed initiatives.

1. Reviewer incentives
Label	Author	Description from paper
Non-financial	Barroga (2020)	’Nonfinancial incentives may come in the forms of frequent reviewer invitations, being up-to-date with research developments, opportunities to influence science, increased acumen in reviewing, free journal access or subscription, access to databases/research platforms and digital libraries, acknowledgment in journal websites, publicized reviews, letter of thanks, certificates of excellence, and editorial board appointment.’
Crediting	Barroga (2020)	‘Crediting incentives may be given by formally recognising the reviewing work and linking peer review activity to ORCID records using DOIs.’
Financial	Barroga (2020)	‘Financial incentives can be received through the Rubriq system by providing pre-publication reviews or from compensation derived from the article processing charge. Although cash incentives can hasten reviews, many journals cannot realistically afford it. Cash incentives may also affect the quality of review, transform the review process into business, or damage the moral sentiments of researchers. Other forms of financial incentives include waiver of publication charges and free access to paid articles.’
Reviewer credit	Tennant (2018)	‘How to provide and receive appropriate credit for peer review is an ongoing debate … There is … currently a great potential scope of providing more detailed information about peer review quality, in a manner that is further tied to researcher reputation and certification. The main barrier that remains here is the fact that peer review is still largely a closed and secretive process, which inhibits the distribution of any form of credit.’
Rewarding peer review	Burley (2017)	‘... recognizing and rewarding peer reviewers has become a priority for scholarly societies, publishers, and service providers. For example, societies publish lists of the most prolific and helpful reviewers; publishers give public credit and provide additional rewards; and service providers enable the collection of data on reviews and reviewers to enhance reviewer visibility and rewards. Further still, Publons is a start-up dedicated to publicly recognizing reviewers for their contribution, enabling reviewers to track and showcase their activities.
2. Reviewer support
Label	Author	Description from paper
Guidelines and training	Barroga (2020)	‘Training is achieved when reviewing author instructions from journals, receiving guidance from academic peers, or continuing education on digitization and open access ... training and orientation through the Publons Academy can be received to further develop skills in reviewing.’
Core competencies	Barroga (2020)	‘Core competencies among peer reviewers are based on the recommendations of associations concerned with the integrity of peer review. These associations include the Council of Science Editors (CSE), World Association of Medical Editors (WAME), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE), and Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The core competencies commonly recommended by these associations may be categorized as reviewer's responsibilities to the authors, editors, and readers.’
Training and mentoring	Bruce et al. (2016)	‘Training, which included training or mentoring programs for peer reviewers to provide instructional support for appropriately evaluating important components of manuscript submissions. These interventions directly target the ability of peer reviewers to appropriately evaluate the quality of the manuscripts.’
Checklists	Bruce et al. (2016)	‘Peer reviewers’ use of a checklist, such as reporting guideline checklists, to evaluate the quality of the manuscript.’