Nature looks to open up 'black box' of science by publishing peer review files
In a Monday editorial, the journal announced it would include peer review files with the papers it publishes, offering access to once behind-the-scenes processes in which reviewers critique scientific papers and authors respond with changes.
Publishing peer review files at Nature has been optional since 2020; starting Monday, it is now automatic.
'Our aim in doing so is to open up what many see as the 'black box' of science, shedding light on how a research paper is made. This serves to increase transparency and (we hope) to build trust in the scientific process,' the Nature editorial said. 'Making peer-reviewer reports public also enriches science communication: it's a chance to add to the 'story' of how a result is arrived at, or a conclusion supported.'
Opening up the peer review process is growing more common among scientific journals, but Nature is one of the largest and most influential journals to adopt the practice.
When a science study is submitted to a credible journal, the study will undergo a peer review, a process in which experts in the field probe the work for poor reasoning, bad research practices and data errors, among other issues. These outside experts share their feedback to journal editors and the authors in what are called referees' reports.
'Peer review improves papers,' the editorial said. 'The exchanges between authors and referees should be seen as a crucial part of the scientific record, just as they are a key part of doing and disseminating research.'
Nature's new process will make the referees' reports and authors' responses public by default. The journal's move comes at a time when trust in science has dipped. A Pew Research Center poll in fall 2024 showed that confidence in scientists had dropped about 10 percentage points from 2019 to 2024, and only 45% of Americans viewed scientists as good communicators.
Michael Eisen, the former editor of the scientific journal eLife and a proponent of revamping the scientific publishing process, said he viewed Nature's decision as 'a move in the right direction overall toward more transparency in publishing.'
'I think seeing the sausage is good,' Eisen said, adding that he thought it could help improve trust in science. 'There's a lot of criticism that stems from lack of understanding. That lack of understanding, from my point of view, stems from lack of transparency from scientists and science over what the process is.'
Eisen said the move could help skeptics of science see how much rigor and questioning is applied to key topics.
'With a vaccine paper, I think it would be good if people saw the scrutiny a paper goes through. It would help people understand and appreciate the science and how it's contextualized better,' Eisen said.
At the same time, it could help prevent the overstatement of splashy findings.
'Maybe it will help people get past the idea that when a paper is published it's bulletproof and there's no questions remaining,' Eisen said.
Eisen said Nature could also make public its reviewers' comments on rejected manuscripts, which sometimes get published by other scientific journals.
'The real radical move is publishing the reviews of all papers,' Eisen said. 'Seeing what questions came up in the reviews of accepted papers is one thing; seeing why papers were rejected by journals is another.'
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Alien worlds may not necessarily need water, scientists find: ‘We just opened a Pandora's box'
Water may not be essential to support life, and an entirely different type of liquid could do the same in alien worlds, a new study claims. Until now, water has been considered a requirement for life on other worlds, with scientists defining the habitability of other planets based on its presence. However, a new lab experiment suggests salts existing in liquid form at lower temperatures in other worlds may host life, though unlike anything resembling Earth's water-based beings. Such liquid-salts, called ionic liquids, can exist below about 100 degrees Celsius and remain stable enough in the fluid state at wider conditions to be a hospitable environment for life-signature molecules like proteins, say researchers from the Massachussets Institute of Technology. The study, published in the journal PNAS, theorises that even planets that are too warm, or those with atmospheres at pressures too low to host liquid water, could still support pockets of ionic liquid. 'We consider water to be required for life because that is what's needed for Earth life. But if we look at a more general definition, we see that what we need is a liquid in which metabolism for life can take place,' says Rachana Agrawal, an author of the study from MIT. 'Now if we include ionic liquid as a possibility, this can dramatically increase the habitability zone for all rocky worlds,' Dr Agrawal said. On Earth, such ionic liquids are mainly only made for industries, and do not occur naturally – except for one natural case. One liquid salt is generated from the mixing of venoms produced by two rival species of ants. In the new study, scientists sought to understand the broad conditions under which ionic liquids can be naturally produced, including the range of temperatures and pressures. They started by mixing sulphuric acid with 30 different nitrogen-containing organic compounds across several temperatures and pressures. Researchers then observed whether an ionic liquid formed when they evaporated away the sulphuric acid in various vials. This work was based on previous work suggesting that some of these chemicals, considered ingredients associated with life, are surprisingly stable in sulphuric acid. Scientists also mixed the ingredients onto basalt rocks, which are known to exist on the surface of many rocky planets. 'We were just astonished that the ionic liquid forms under so many different conditions,' says Sara Seager, another author of the study. 'If you put the sulphuric acid and the organic on a rock, the excess sulphuric acid seeps into the rock pores, but you're still left with a drop of ionic liquid on the rock. Whatever we tried, ionic liquid still formed,' Dr Seager says. Researchers found that their reactions produced ionic liquid at temperatures up to 180 degrees Celsius and at extremely low pressures – much lower than that of the Earth's atmosphere. The findings suggest ionic liquids can naturally form on other planets where liquid water cannot exist, under the right conditions. 'We're envisioning a planet warmer than Earth, that doesn't have water, and at some point in its past or currently, it has to have had sulphuric acid, formed from volcanic outgassing,' Dr Seager says. 'This sulphuric acid has to flow over a little pocket of organics. And organic deposits are extremely common in the solar system,' she explained. Scientists hope to conduct further studies to see what life-signature molecules might survive and thrive in ionic liquids. 'We just opened up a Pandora's box of new research. It's been a real journey,' Dr Seager said.
Medscape
25 minutes ago
- Medscape
Drug Combinations for CVDs Tied to Bullous Pemphigoid Risk
TOPLINE: A case-control study revealed that combinations of drugs for cardiovascular diseases and hypertension were frequently prescribed before a diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid (BP), but the risk associated with combinations did not exceed that associated with individual agents. The most common drug combinations included angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors with statins and antiplatelets with statins. METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted a nested case-control study using healthcare records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink between 1998 and 2021 and analysed 16,844 BP cases and 79,493 age- and sex-matched control individuals having no BP diagnosis at the index date (the first date a BP diagnosis code was recorded). Association rule mining (ARM) identified the 10 most common drug class or active substance pairs prescribed to cases or control individuals on the same day and within 6 months before the index date. In the sensitivity analysis, researchers identified medication pairs prescribed within 30 days of each other and during the 6 months preceding the index date. Researchers quantified how often two drugs are co-prescribed compared with their independent prescribing by calculating a lift. They then derived the fold change (FC) as the ratio of a lift in cases vs control individuals. The analysis included multivariable conditional logistic regression to estimate the risk for BP following drug combinations and their constituent drugs. TAKEAWAY: The most frequent drug combinations associated with an increased risk for BP were ACE inhibitors-statins (FC of the lifts in the main analysis vs sensitivity analysis: 1.31 vs 1.18), antiplatelets-statins (1.23 vs 1.11), proton pump inhibitors (PPI)-antiplatelets (1.22 vs 1.14), PPI-statins (1.22 vs 1.14), and ACE inhibitors-antiplatelets (1.20 vs 1.09). For drug substances, combinations with a greater lift in BP cases were simvastatin-ramipril (FC, 1.30), simvastatin-aspirin (FC, 1.21), and ramipril-aspirin (FC, 1.19). After adjusting for BP-associated drugs, the Charlson Comorbidity Index, and relevant confounders, the increased risk remained significant for these drug class combinations: antiplatelets-statins (odds ratio [OR], 1.20), ACE inhibitors-statins (OR, 1.16), PPI-statins (OR, 1.22), ACE inhibitors-antiplatelets (OR, 1.26), and PPI-antiplatelets (OR, 1.43; P < .001 for all). The risk for BP associated with these frequently prescribed drug combinations was lower than the risk linked to each constituent drug at both class and substance levels. In both main and sensitivity analyses, patients who developed BP were more likely than control individuals to have received combinations of cardiovascular or antihypertensive drugs before diagnosis. IN PRACTICE: "The ARM algorithm exploratory analysis identified the most commonly prescribed drug combinations prior to BP. Logistic regression confirmed drug combinations for CVDs [cardiovascular diseases] or hypertension associated with increased BP risk," the authors wrote. "The increased BP risk following reported combinations was modest and was not greater than their constituent drugs. Given that the number of patients with BP is low, we do not suggest avoiding the reported drugs but instead being on the lookout for any skin reactions following treatments for CVDs or hypertension," they concluded. SOURCE: This study was led by Mikolaj Swiderski, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, England. It was published online on August 06, 2025, in Clinical and Experimental Dermatology. LIMITATIONS: The ARM algorithm considered only the frequency of prescriptions to obtain drug combinations. Additionally, the algorithm demonstrated limited clinical value, linking only half of the inferred drug class combinations with BP and failing to capture the sequence or precise timing of prescriptions. It also lacked dosage and treatment duration data, and as an exploratory tool, ARM could not establish causal relationships between drug exposures and the risk for BP. DISCLOSURES: This research was supported by the National Institute for Health and Care Research grant via the Research for Patient Benefit Programme. Swiderski reported receiving salary funding from this grant. Another author reported receiving salary funding from King's College London, University of Nottingham, and the National Institute for Health and Care Research East Midlands scholarship scheme. Additional disclosures are noted in the original article. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
Medscape
25 minutes ago
- Medscape
A1c Testing in EDs Can Spot Undiagnosed Diabetes Cases
TOPLINE: Among adults aged 30 years or older presenting to the emergency department (ED) without a prior diagnosis of type 2 diabetes (T2D), A1c testing combined with the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) identified a substantial proportion with prediabetes or diabetes — especially among those from ethnically diverse populations. METHODOLOGY: Researchers in England conducted a prospective study from December 2021 to December 2022 to determine the prevalence of glucose intolerance among 1382 individuals aged 30 years or older (45.1% men) who did not have a known diagnosis of diabetes and presented to the ED of a hospital in Manchester. They also tested the utility of the FINDRISC in predicting the risk for diabetes in high-risk individuals. Data on demographics, lifestyle factors, physical measurements, and A1c levels were collected, and the FINDRISC assessment was conducted by trained staff. Patients were classified as those having normal glucose tolerance, prediabetes, or diabetes according to both National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines. TAKEAWAY: On the basis of the NICE criteria, 80.1% of attendees had normal glucose tolerance, 11.6% had prediabetes, and 8.3% had diabetes; on the basis of the ADA criteria, the corresponding percentages were 61.3%, 30.4%, and 8.3%, respectively. Each unit increase in the FINDRISC was linked to an 8% (5%-12%) higher risk for prediabetes and a 16% (10%-23%) higher risk for diabetes, as per the NICE criteria, with similar findings seen for the ADA criteria as well; the risk remained elevated even after adjustment for confounders. Compared with White individuals, British South Asian and other minority groups showed nearly twice the risk for prediabetes (relative risk ratio [RRR], 1.94; 95% CI, 1.11-3.38) and three times the risk for diabetes (RRR, 2.80; 95% CI, 1.61-4.84). IN PRACTICE: "The considerable prevalence of undiagnosed diabetes within our patient population highlights the critical need for routine HbA1c screening in this setting, which may be the only place where hard-to-reach individuals may attend for healthcare," the authors wrote. SOURCE: This study was led by Edward B. Jude, Tameside and Glossop Integrated Care, NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, England. It was published online on August 06, 2025, in Diabetes Therapy. LIMITATIONS: The accuracy of A1c testing can be affected by conditions altering the quality or quantity of haemoglobin, such as anaemia or haemoglobinopathies, potentially leading to an underestimation of diabetes prevalence. Selection bias may exist as the study focused only on patients who underwent bloodwork in the ED. The single-centre nature of the study limited the generalisability of the results. DISCLOSURES: This study received partial funding from Sanofi Pharmaceuticals and Novo Nordisk. One author was supported by the 4Ward North Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Training Fellowship, and another author declared receiving travel and research grants from the funding agencies and other sources. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.
