Paucity of Good Reviewers: A Challenge to Research

Abstract The peer-review system, the backbone of research quality control, is showing signs of serious strains. Finding qualified and willing reviewers is getting difficult, and reviewers either don't even acknowledge the receipt of the review invitation or reject it outright, if it is even marginally outside their comfort zone. Editors are overburdened with a high volume of submissions. This requires efficient triage and a keen understanding of diverse scientific fields. The peer-review process is getting increasingly difficult, particularly if the editor wishes to get timely assessments from busy domain experts. Then again, ethical considerations are also vital, particularly around bias and misconduct, and this too demands rigorous scrutiny. The emergence of artificial intelligence in research has added a whole new dimension, as it poses both opportunities and complications. While there should be no issue if artificial intelligence is being used to improve the language of text, any further assistance demands clear guidelines to maintain the value of human authorship and reviewership. Clearly, the time has come to incentivize the reviewers, and journals have to think of ways of doing so without encountering conflict of interest.