A central pillar of academic publishing, peer review has always been a hotly debated, highly politicized, and controversial subject in the industry, and with good reason. While trends frequently come and go, its central premise—the requirement to have scholarly research scrutinized by fellow academics—eternally prevails. But, so do many of the challenges associated with peer review, such as the slowing down of publication, a lack of resources, poor transparency, potential bias and unfairness.

In the midst of the pandemic, the traditional peer review process was left looking tired and exposed, as a deluge of important scientific research required far more dynamic systems of approval to fast-track research and meet the needs of the global battle against COVID-19. As a result, we witnessed a rise of preprints, not to mention subsequent retractions, and an increase in paid peer reviews, as an already time-poor pool of academics found itself stretched more than ever before and demanding remuneration for the overtime.