Editorial
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
World J Clin Cases. Feb 26, 2021; 9(6): 1247-1250
Published online Feb 26, 2021. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v9.i6.1247
Interactive platform for peer review: A proposal to improve the current peer review system
Sameh Hany Emile
Sameh Hany Emile, General Surgery Department, Mansoura University Hospitals, Mansoura University, Mansoura 35516, Egypt
Author contributions: Emile SH wrote and revised the manuscript.
Conflict-of-interest statement: No conflict of interest to be disclosed by the author.
Open-Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Sameh Hany Emile, FACS, MBChB, MD, MSc, PhD, Associate Professor, Surgeon, General Surgery Department, Mansoura University Hospitals, Mansoura University, Dakahlia Governorate, Mansoura 35516, Egypt. dr_sameh81@mans.edu.eg
Received: December 14, 2020
Peer-review started: December 14, 2020
First decision: December 24, 2020
Revised: December 26, 2020
Accepted: January 7, 2021
Article in press: January 7, 2021
Published online: February 26, 2021
Core Tip

Core Tip: Peer review is the guarantor of the quality of the scientific literature. Although peer review plays a pivotal role in the vetting of the scholarly work submitted for publication and identification of its shortcomings and limitations, it still has its own limitations. The main drawbacks of the current peer review system are the extended time needed for reviewing articles, the difficulty in finding available expert reviewers, and the lack of direct communication between the reviewers and authors in an anonymous manner. The present editorial suggests an alternative, improved platform for peer review that involves direct communication between the authors and the reviewers in a real-time, anonymized manner. The proposed platform would provide more robust, quicker, and perhaps a fairer system for peer review of the literature.