PubPeer
From HandWiki
Short description: Scientific review website
| Website | https://pubpeer.com |
|---|---|
| Launched | 2012 |
PubPeer is a website that allows users to discuss and review scientific research after publication, i.e. post-publication peer review.
The site has served as a whistleblowing platform, in that it highlighted shortcomings in several high-profile papers, in some cases leading to retractions and to accusations of scientific fraud,[1][2][3][4] as noted by Retraction Watch.[5] Contrary to most platforms, it allows anonymous post-publication commenting, a controversial feature which is the main factor for its success.[6] Consequently, accusations of libel have been levelled at some of PubPeer's users;[7][8] correspondingly the website has since 2016 told commentators to use only facts that can be publicly verified.[9]
See also
References
- ↑ "Researcher admits mistakes in stem cell study". Phys.org. May 2013. https://phys.org/news/2013-05-stem-cell.html.
- ↑ Sven Stockrahm; Lydia Klöckner; Dagny Lüdemann (2013-05-23). "Zellbiologe gibt Fehler in Klonstudie zu". Zeit. http://www.zeit.de/wissen/gesundheit/2013-05/klonen-studie-fehler-mitalipov-reaktion.
- ↑ "Stem cell cloner acknowledges errors in ground breaking paper". Nature. http://www.nature.com/news/stem-cell-cloner-acknowledges-errors-in-groundbreaking-paper-1.13060.
- ↑ "Stapgate shows Japan must get back to basics in science". Japan Times. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2014/04/20/national/stapgate-shows-japan-must-get-back-to-basics-in-science/#.U2skY8fTZss.
- ↑ "Leading diabetes researcher corrects paper as more than a dozen studies are questioned on PubPeer". Retraction Watch. 12 January 2015. http://retractionwatch.com/2015/01/12/leading-diabetes-researcher-corrects-paper-dozen-studies-questioned-pubpeer/. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
- ↑ Torny, Didier (February 2018). "Pubpeer: vigilante science, journal club or alarm raiser? The controversies over anonymity in post-publication peer review". International Conference on Peer Review. https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01700198.
- ↑ Paul Jump (13 November 2014). "Can post-publication peer review endure?". Times Higher Education. http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/can-post-publication-peer-review-endure/2016895.article. Retrieved 5 December 2014.
- ↑ Peer 0 (24 August 2014). "PubPeer's first legal threat" (blog). https://pubpeer.com/topics/1/3F5792FF283A624FB48E773CAAD150. Retrieved 5 December 2014.
- ↑ "PubPeer - How to comment on PubPeer". Archived from the original on 15 November 2016. https://web.archive.org/web/20161115164005/https://pubpeer.com/howto. Retrieved 17 May 2017.
Further reading
- Couzin-Frankel, Jennifer (31 August 2015). "PubPeer's secret is out: Founder of controversial website reveals himself" (in en). Science AAAS. https://www.science.org/content/article/pubpeer-s-secret-out-founder-controversial-website-reveals-himself.
External links
- PubPeer Selections on Retraction Watch
 |  |
