At the heart of biomedical publishing integrity lies peer review—long regarded as the “gold standard” of scientific validation. Yet, despite its foundational role, peer review today reveals critical shortcomings: inconsistency, lack of transparency, slow turnaround, and susceptibility to bias. As the scientific landscape evolves with rising submission volumes, data complexity, and urgency for rapid knowledge dissemination, it is no longer enough to refine peer review; it must be reimagined.
As editors and long-time participants in academic publishing, we have consistently faced the challenges of writing, reviewing, and managing peer evaluations. Identifying qualified reviewers and synthesizing their feedback into fair editorial decisions remains a formidable task. This editorial outlines our concerns and envisions how artificial intelligence (AI) can enhance—not replace—peer review in medicine. Over 90% of the initial text was generated with ChatGPT Scholar using structured prompts; it has since been extensively revised by the authors. [More]