Table 1 Survey questions to the BMC Pharmacology & Toxicology Editorial Board

1.

Is your area of expertise in medicine or biology?

If medicine, are you a clinical academic or full time academic?

2.

How many years have you been working as an academic?

3.

Choose one that best describes you:

I was on the original board of BMC Clinical Pharmacology

I was on the original board of BMC Pharmacology

I joined the editorial board of BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology within the last 2 years.

4.

As an author, have you published in an open peer review journal? (meaning that the reviewers’ identity was revealed to you as an author)

4a (if yes) Do you think reports were less/equally/more useful to you than those from a closed peer review journal? If you have never published in a closed peer review journal please go to the next question.

4b (if no) Would you consider publishing in an open peer review journal? (if no, why?)

5.

As a reviewer which peer review system do you prefer, and why?

5a Open (authors and reading public know reviewers’ identity)

5b single-blind (i.e. reviewers know authors’ identity but not vice versa)

5c double-blind (i.e. authors and reviewers do not know each other’s identity)

6.

As a handling editor do you prefer a different (from your answer to question 5) model of peer review?

6a (If yes), which model do you prefer and why do you have a different preference as an editor compared to as a reviewer?

7.

As a reader do you look at the pre-publication histories on BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology (or any of the open peer review journals in the BMC series)?

7a If no, why not?

7b If yes, what is your main reason for looking at the pre-publication history?

8.

Do you have any further comments on open peer review?