Opening the review: perceptions and challenges of Open Science at CSP

Area of Science:

• Public Health
• Bibliometrics
• Scientific Communication

Background:

• Open Science practices are transforming scholarly publishing.
• Open Peer Review (OPR) is an emerging model aiming to increase transparency and accountability in scientific evaluation.
• Cadernos de Saúde Pública (CSP) is exploring the adoption of OPR within its editorial processes.

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze the perceptions and challenges associated with Open Peer Review (OPR) among contributors to Cadernos de Saúde Pública (CSP).
• To understand how authors and reviewers perceive the adoption of OPR in the context of Open Science.
• To identify factors influencing the acceptance and implementation of OPR in a Brazilian public health journal.

Main Methods:

• A cross-sectional survey was conducted between January and April 2025.
• The study targeted 1,280 respondents from nearly 3,000 Brazilian reviewers of CSP from the past three years.
• A 20-question questionnaire (REDCap) assessed perceptions of OPR, including author/reviewer anonymity, conflicts of interest, and professional constraints.

Main Results:

• A significant portion of respondents expressed caution towards OPR, with 23.1% in favor of disclosing names, 24.2% opposed, and 32.7% preferring intermediate stances.
• Prior knowledge between authors and reviewers (52.7%) was identified as the primary source of discomfort.
• Fears regarding conflicts of interest and professional constraints were also notable concerns.

Conclusions:

• The CSP scientific community acknowledges the potential of OPR to enhance transparency.
• Successful OPR implementation requires clear guidelines, active editorial mediation, participant protection, and recognition of review work.
• Gradual, contextualized implementation with dialogue and training is crucial for model acceptance, strengthening scientific integrity and trust.