Velterop JJM: Keeping the minutes of science. Electronic library and visual information research (ELVIRA 2). Edited by: Collier M, Arnold K. 1995, Milton Keynes, Aslib: Proceedings of the second ELVIRA conference at De Montfort University
National Research Council: On Being a Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research: Third Edition. 2009, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press
Ploegh H: End the wasteful tyranny of reviewer experiments. Nature. 2011, 472: 391-10.1038/472391a.
Walbot V: Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts?. J Biol. 2009, 8: 24-10.1186/jbiol125.
Godlee F: Making reviewers visible: openness, accountability, and credit. JAMA. 2002, 287: 2762-2765. 10.1001/jama.287.21.2762.
Groves T: Is open peer review the fairest system? Yes. BMJ. 2010, 341: c6424-10.1136/bmj.c6424.
Pöschl U: Multi-stage open peer review: scientific evaluation integrating the strengths of traditional peer review with the virtues of transparency and self-regulation. Front Comput Neurosci. 2012, 6: 33-
Kowalczuk MK, Dudbridge F, Nanda S, Harriman SL, Moylan EC: A comparison of the quality of reviewer reports from author-suggested reviewers and editor-suggested reviewers in journals operating on open or closed peer review models. F1000 Posters. 2013, 4: 1252-
Khan K: Is open peer review the fairest system? No. BMJ. 2010, 341: c6425-10.1136/bmj.c6425.
van Rooyen S, Godlee F, Evans S, Black N, Smith R: Effect of open peer review on quality of reviews and on reviewers’ recommendations: a randomised trial. BMJ. 1999, 318: 23-27. 10.1136/bmj.318.7175.23.
Editors TPSM: Peer review in PloS medicine. PLoS Med. 2007, 4: e58-