Despite being a staple of our science, the process of pre-publication peer review has few agreed-upon standards defining its goals or ideal execution. As a community of reviewers and authors, we assembled an evaluation format and associated specific standards for the process as we think it should be practiced. We propose that we apply, debate, and ultimately extend these to improve the transparency of our criticism and the speed with which quality data and ideas become public.
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
These ideas came out of discourse at a meeting of immunologists in Skamania, WA in June 2019 (Immuno-Skamania) organized by Mark Ansel, Ananda Goldrath, Max Krummel, and Marion Pepper. We thank all attendees, Burroughs Wellcome Trust, and UCSF ImmunoX Initiative for funding to help defray the costs of the meeting. We thank Vincent Chan and Isabelle Tingin for assistance in preparing the manuscript.