Recommendations for accelerating open preprint peer review to improve the culture of science.

Peer review is an important part of the scientific process, but traditional peer review at journals is coming under increased scrutiny for its inefficiency and lack of transparency. As preprints become more widely used and accepted, they raise the possibility of rethinking the peer-review process. Preprints are enabling new forms of peer review that have the potential to be more thorough, inclusive, and collegial than traditional journal peer review, and to thus fundamentally shift the culture of peer review toward constructive collaboration. In this Consensus View, we make a call to action to stakeholders in the community to accelerate the growing momentum of preprint sharing and provide recommendations to empower researchers to provide open and constructive peer review for preprints.

COVID-19 Rapid Review cross-publisher initiative: What we have learned and what we are going to do next.

The global crisis sparked collaboration between publishers and service providers to successfully address an immediate problem and demonstrated the possibility for future partnerships.Encouraging experts to join a reviewer pool and quickly review the preprint and journal submissions, we were able to publish COVID-19 research more quickly.The initiative confirmed little author uptake of inter-publisher journal transfer option.The collaboration showed wide consensus on open science practices which will ensure faster and more reliable research findings.

Embedding Physical Activity Guidance During Pregnancy and in Postpartum Care: 'This Mum Moves' Enhances Professional Practice of Midwives and Health Visitors.

INTRODUCTION: The benefits of physical activity during pregnancy and after childbirth are well established, yet many health care professionals do not feel well equipped to provide physical activity guidance to these populations. As such, the objectives of this study were to explore the immediate and longer term effects of training on health care professionals' ability to provide physical activity guidance to pregnant women and new mothers (mums). METHODS: Midwives and health visitors from 5 locations in the United Kingdom were provided with training on the Chief Medical Officers' physical activity guidelines for pregnancy and after childbirth (n = 393). Midwives and health visitors attended training to become This Mum Moves Ambassadors, then disseminated education to colleagues through a cascade training model. Changes in knowledge, confidence, and professional practice were assessed by survey before and immediately after training (n = 247), and follow-up surveys were completed 3 (n = 35) and 6 (n = 34) months posttraining. RESULTS: At all posttraining time points, health care professionals reported a significant increase in their confidence to communicate about physical activity (P < .001). The reported frequency of having conversations about physical activity increased significantly 3 and 6 months following training compared with baseline (pregnant women, P = .017; new mums, P = .005). There were changes in the types of advice and resources offered by health care professionals and an overall increase in health care professionals' own reported physical activity levels. DISCUSSION: The This Mum Moves cascade approach to delivering training in physical activity guidelines improved reported knowledge, confidence and professional practice of midwives and health visitors, both immediately following and 3 and 6 months after training.

Publishing peer review materials.

Publishing peer review materials alongside research articles promises to make the peer review process more transparent as well as making it easier to recognise these contributions and give credit to peer reviewers. Traditionally, the peer review reports, editors letters and author responses are only shared between the small number of people in those roles prior to publication, but there is a growing interest in making some or all of these materials available. A small number of journals have been publishing peer review materials for some time, others have begun this practice more recently, and significantly more are now considering how they might begin. This article outlines the outcomes from a recent workshop among journals with experience in publishing peer review materials, in which the specific operation of these workflows, and the challenges, were discussed. Here, we provide a draft as to how to represent these materials in the JATS and Crossref data models to facilitate the coordination and discoverability of peer review materials, and seek feedback on these initial recommendations.