PubPeer

fmcdfigcdfkdghdklblbbpacikcchbbh

Show links to existing PubPeer comments

Latest reviews

• (2025-07-03) Zsombor Szabó: There are a lot of bugs
• (2025-03-11) Luke Steiger: Great extension and service - just bear in mind you need to use your skills as a scientist to determine the credibility of comments and how much the influence the findings. It's a good resource for starting discussion, but don't uncritically discard studies that draw debate
• (2025-03-04) Vendula Koublová: Useful extension, highly recommend. The 1* reviews have some obvious biases. Any author has the chance to respond to comments related to their paper. Instead, some choose to come here and rate the extension poorly. That doesn't feel like an effort to sustain a fair scientific discussion. I'm experiencing some issues with the PubPeer bar display. When I close the bar, an annoying blank line stays in its place and the whole page is still shifted down. As Tomas Fiers suggested, the developers might want to consider another visual indication of an existing comment.
• (2024-12-13) D Starling: useful extension. as others have said, run the names of the 1 star reviews through it, as they seem to be scorned by the service more than anything.
• (2024-11-29) Mohammad Olfati: This website has become a breeding ground for bias and jealousy. I firmly disagree with the use of pseudonyms on PubPeer, particularly when individuals make comments on academic papers. This conduct erodes trust and should not be condoned. Rather, we should promote the utilization of official university or institutional email addresses, along with the researcher’s complete name and affiliated organization, to foster transparency and responsibility. Constructive and transparent criticism is beneficial when it includes the critic's real name and academic email address.
• (2024-07-28) Matthew 'Jesus' Elvey: -1/2: Glitchy - e.g. says there's a note on PMID 33057181, but doesn't display one. -1/2: Shadowbans some comments. (Censors them from view, except to the author) It's informative to look up the people who put up 1-star votes in PubPeer, e.g. AKP brings up TWO RETRACTED articles; their PubMed IDs are 30685132 and 23069613.
• (2024-07-19) Anil K Patel: Once individuals present themselves as a known entity, I trust that they pose genuine, scientifically relevant questions. Otherwise, it appears as an attempt to undermine others cowardly and unscientifically. Open discussion of published studies and data interpretation is beneficial, but comments should be peer-reviewed and articulated scientifically to address specific concerns. I am more than happy to address questions from individuals who identify themselves, allowing me to gauge their professional background, work quality, and ethical conduct. Engaging with an AI and being confined to a questioning box feels unfair. Transparency and mutual respect are key in these interactions.
• (2024-03-16) Amjad Pasha: I strongly disagree with the practice of using a fictitious name on PubPeer, particularly when it is associated with an author who comments on scientific articles. This behavior is cowardly and should not be encouraged. Instead, it is important to promote the use of official university or organizational email addresses, along with the full name and affiliation of the researcher, to ensure transparency and accountability.
• (2024-01-24) KS Sam: The idea of open discussion of published studies is good, but the comments need to be peer-reviewed and describe the concerns in a scientific manner. Further, there is no reason to use pseudonyms. If the plan is to question data or interpretation, it should be done openly.
• (2022-07-25) Riia Jarvenpaa: This is really valuable project, huge respect for the people behind it. The usability of the extension could of course be better, like all of the internet. This is an open source project and people interested about the transparency of the science can contribute by donating the project money or their expertise.
• (2022-07-25) Riia Jarvenpaa: This is really valuable project, huge respect for the people behind it. The usability of the extension could of course be better, like all of the internet. This is an open source project and people interested about the transparency of the science can contribute by donating the project money or their expertise.
• (2022-04-05) Tomas Fiers: PubPeer seems like a good project and I fully agree with the idea of open comments. This browser extension works well, but is often a bit annoying: the PubPeer bar at the top of the page appears only after the page has loaded, which causes the page contents to suddenly shift down. This could be fixed by having another indicator (maybe a small fixed-pos sidebar like Scite or Hypothesis do). Another problem is mentioned by Balázs Knakker below: The PubPeer bar appears and says "There are 2 articles on this page with PubPeer comments" (neither of those comments were particularly enlightening or relevant to article I was quickly checking out). This makes the high saliency of the PubPeer bar not worth it.
• (2022-04-05) Tomas Fiers: PubPeer seems like a good project and I fully agree with the idea of open comments. This browser extension works well, but is often a bit annoying: the PubPeer bar at the top of the page appears only after the page has loaded, which causes the page contents to suddenly shift down. This could be fixed by having another indicator (maybe a small fixed-pos sidebar like Scite or Hypothesis do). Another problem is mentioned by Balázs Knakker below: The PubPeer bar appears and says "There are 2 articles on this page with PubPeer comments" (neither of those comments were particularly enlightening or relevant to article I was quickly checking out). This makes the high saliency of the PubPeer bar not worth it.
• (2021-09-25) Ben Prytherch: Works great. I use it all the time. PubPeer is a vitally important tool for holding the practice of science to the ideals of science.
• (2021-09-25) Ben Prytherch: Works great. I use it all the time. PubPeer is a vitally important tool for holding the practice of science to the ideals of science.
• (2021-06-24) Richard Seglenieks: Seems to be working great! Displays notifications on PubMed, journal websites and search engines. Can click through from the notification to the PubPeer page. Thanks
• (2021-06-24) Richard Seglenieks: Seems to be working great! Displays notifications on PubMed, journal websites and search engines. Can click through from the notification to the PubPeer page. Thanks
• (2021-06-24) 劉well: nice
• (2021-06-24) 劉well: nice
• (2020-12-11) R. M.: Random pop-ups on non-pubpeer pages are unacceptable. (got pop-up idk about what on google.com)
• (2020-12-11) R. M.: Random pop-ups on non-pubpeer pages are unacceptable. (got pop-up idk about what on google.com)
• (2020-04-03) John Lu: When using PubMed, the displayed article is another article, which is not accurate enough
• (2020-04-03) John Lu: When using PubMed, the displayed article is another article, which is not accurate enough
• (2019-12-18) Balázs Knakker: I love and highly appreciate PubPeer, but I find the way the extension works annoying and misguided. In particular, I am not interested in whether cited or linked papers on a page have comments on PubPeer or not. Really, never. I think it would make a lot more sense to just show the top bar if the currently viewed paper has comments on pubpeer. Perhaps comments of linked papers could get a little number in the app's icon, or just could be left out altogether.
• (2019-12-18) Balázs Knakker: I love and highly appreciate PubPeer, but I find the way the extension works annoying and misguided. In particular, I am not interested in whether cited or linked papers on a page have comments on PubPeer or not. Really, never. I think it would make a lot more sense to just show the top bar if the currently viewed paper has comments on pubpeer. Perhaps comments of linked papers could get a little number in the app's icon, or just could be left out altogether.
• (2019-11-18) Mahesh Miikael Karnani: New update is great! Love this plugin!
• (2019-11-18) Mahesh Miikael Karnani: New update is great! Love this plugin!
• (2018-05-07) Danny Garside: Lovely idea. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to work. At all. Will keep installed, and update review if anything changes.
• (2018-05-07) Danny Garside: Lovely idea. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to work. At all. Will keep installed, and update review if anything changes.
• (2017-01-28) Za. Z.: I was waiting for such a extension for long time. It works on many websites. I don't have any noticeable delay since I added this extension (cf John Flournoy comment). Too bad, the comment section isn't open to everyone.
• (2017-01-28) Za. Z.: I was waiting for such a extension for long time. It works on many websites. I don't have any noticeable delay since I added this extension (cf John Flournoy comment). Too bad, the comment section isn't open to everyone.
• (2017-01-27) Maxence Alex: Excellent idea but seems to be useless since : - you can't create anonymous account * - the only scientist that are allowed to post are the one who have published something *. (As everybody knows publishing is a sign of knowledge honesty and wisdom) * "All first and last authors of articles in our database can create an account." A simple flagging system, would have suffice to ban spammers and others low quality comments.
• (2017-01-27) Maxence Alex: Excellent idea but seems to be useless since : - you can't create anonymous account * - the only scientist that are allowed to post are the one who have published something *. (As everybody knows publishing is a sign of knowledge honesty and wisdom) * "All first and last authors of articles in our database can create an account." A simple flagging system, would have suffice to ban spammers and others low quality comments.
• (2016-11-06) i H: 能看见评论，这是坠吼的！
• (2016-10-03) John Flournoy: Very handy and convenient! One con: the api seems to take a long time to respond recently, which freezes pages for 30-60s. This may be idiosyncratic to my system, admittedly.
• (2016-10-03) John Flournoy: Very handy and convenient! One con: the api seems to take a long time to respond recently, which freezes pages for 30-60s. This may be idiosyncratic to my system, admittedly.
• (2016-01-29) druid manus: if there is comment a little yellow bar showsup, if there are no comment you will not see the bar showing up... simple and working....
• (2016-01-29) druid manus: if there is comment a little yellow bar showsup, if there are no comment you will not see the bar showing up... simple and working....
• (2014-05-23) Nick Semenkovich: Injects Jquery in many sites, like in Gmail, wants too many permissions :(