menu ☰
menu ˟

Where are all the reviewers? Interacting with F1000Research’s global peer reviewers using Plotly

12 Sep 2018

At F1000, we pride ourselves on openness and transparency, and are dedicated to serving authors and their associated research communities. That is why we want research to be immediately available and accessible, and adopt a transparent model of peer review, publishing all reviews along with the name and affiliation of the reviewers.

This week is Peer Review week, and given this year’s theme of ‘Diversity and Inclusion’ we took the opportunity to evaluate just how diverse and inclusive our peer review model is, looking at the geographical spread of F1000Research reviewers; the equal opportunities we provide for early career researchers; and the gender balance among F1000Research published reviewers. So, we’ve laid out our data for all to see at DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/QXYFZ, and share it with you now.

Being a global company, we strive to give a global view, to be truly representative of the research community worldwide to minimise potential bias. We have reviewers representing 104 countries, that’s just over half of all countries worldwide, from all continents, except Antarctica.

You can view the data here and pan the globe in our interactive figure below to see for yourselves the geographical spread of our reviewers. As you explore, hover over a country for the detailed figures on the number of reviewers and authors from there.

F1000Research published referee coverage (%) globally (hover for breakdown of referees and authors). F1000 remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps

Want to make your figures interactive? We’re helping researchers visualise their data without traditional constraints. Last summer we partnered with Plotly so that you can publish interactive figures with us, allowing readers to properly explore your data and enabling them to do so at a much finer scale than offered by static figures.

Below we’ve highlighted some referee reports from the six continents that are currently represented to give you a flavour of the diversity in peer review at F1000Research:


Lilit Nersisyan, from Institute of Molecular Biology, National Academy of Sciences of Armenia, Yerevan, Armenia reviewed Bjørn Fjukstad et al.’s software tool article using the Kvik framework to explore gene expression data:

“In their paper, Fjukstad et al., have described Kvik, a web-based tool intended for KEGG pathways based analysis of gene expression data, and easy sharing and delivery of analysis results to a wide audience via web-based visualization.”

North America

Tyler Smith, Center for Marine and Environmental Studies, University of the Virgin Islands, St Thomas, United States Virgin Islands, was one of the reviewers for a research article on coral bleaching by Tom Bridge et al:

“The article is of great interest considering the impact of thermal stress on coral reefs globally, and the pressing need to identify refugia that might support coral diversity in a warming ocean.”


Tsung Lin Yang, from Department of Otolaryngology, National Taiwan University Hospital and College of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan, reviewed a case report by Jason Chan et al., on a rare head and neck cancer that revealed the unique genetic profile of an undifferentiated sarcoma of the tongue:

“A rare undifferentiated tongue sarcoma showing recurrent RETSAT mutations and a loss-of-function POLDIP2 mutation was presented in this case report. By showing comprehensive genetic analyses, it was interesting to identify the unique presentation of the common genes found in head and neck cancer, including TP53, CDKN2A, and NOTCH1. It is undoubtedly that the genetic profiles of this rare tongue sarcoma is different from those found in the common HNSCC because of distinct pathological background.”


Shelley C. Clarke, from ABNJ Tuna Project (Common Oceans), Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia, reviewed a study that investigated the past and current status of Peruvian shark fisheries by Adriana Gonzalez-Pestana et al:

“This paper presents a comprehensive and very useful introduction to the shark fisheries of Peru, a topic about which very little has been published until now. The authors have expended considerable effort to compile historical data and I agree with them that this paper “sets up a baseline for future research”. However, some of the conclusions in the paper lack sufficient justification to be reliable and should be presented as hypotheses for further study rather than findings from this paper.”

South America

Maria Fernanda Avarez et al., systematically reviewed reports about cardiovascular compromise during Chikungunya virus to explore the main clinical features and electrocardiographical findings. Cecilia Perret, from División de Pediatría, Departamento de Enfermedades Infecciosas e Inmunología Pediátricas, Escuela de Medicina, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile was one of the reviewers:

“This is a very interesting article that compiles information relevant to an emerging and widely disseminated infection in the American continent whose complications are still under study and its impact still to be known.”


Peter Adebayo Adewuyi, from Liberia Field Epidemiology Training Program, Monrovia, Liberia; African Field Epidemiology Network (AFENET), Kampala, Uganda reviewed a study by VP Nagraj et al. introducing a user-friendly software tool which can help researchers with handling, visualisation and analysis of epidemiological data during disease outbreaks:

“Data visualization is pertinent to disease monitoring and what the authors have done will aid in helping epidemiologist and public health specialist involved in outbreak response to quickly visualize progression and spread of disease from primary to secondary contacts and how the disease is evolving among contacts. The software will actually achieve its purpose as stated in the conclusion of the write-up. Good work done.”





The post Where are all the reviewers? Interacting with F1000Research’s global peer reviewers using Plotly appeared first on F1000 Blogs.

Click here to view the full article which appeared in F1000 Research