Unfortunately we don't fully support your browser. If you have the option to, please upgrade to a newer version or use Mozilla Firefox, Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome, or Safari 14 or newer. If you are unable to, and need support, please send us your feedback.
We'd appreciate your feedback on this new experience.Tell us what you think(opens in new tab/window)
We are helping ensure that quality research can be accessed, trusted, shared and built upon to accelerate progress in society.
At Elsevier, we are privileged to play a role in helping ensure that quality research can be accessed, trusted, shared and built upon to accelerate progress that benefits society. Our 2,800 journals are integral to the scientific record and to the broader exchange of knowledge and ideas. To support this scientific endeavor, the editorial review, peer review and other parts of the publishing process faithfully mirror the rigor and care that goes into research itself.
Each year, we receive around 2.6 million research papers from authors. These are carefully reviewed by our in-house editorial teams in collaboration with 32,000 editors and 1.4 million expert reviewers around the world, resulting in over 600,000 articles being enhanced, indexed, certified, published and promoted following peer review.
We support authors with training resources to help with the writing and publication of research articles, covering topics from proper design methodology to ethical article submission. Our online lectures and interactive courses cover topics from authorship, plagiarism and conflict of interest.
We invest in continuous improvements to make the publication process more efficient for researchers. For example, the reviewer recommender tool(opens in new tab/window) helps evaluate the suitability and expertise of millions of potential peer reviewers. It also helps editors reach beyond their own networks and can make the peer review process more inclusive, taking a step towards improving research diversity.
We work with a network of 32,000 editors worldwide to ensure the integrity of published research. Our publicly Publishing Ethics Resource Kit (PERK). Additionally, Elsevier-published journals are members of COPE, the Committee on Publication Ethics(opens in new tab/window), a forum for editors of peer-reviewed journals to discuss issues related to publication ethics and the integrity of the scientific record.
We are passionate about our commitment to help high-quality research to be published, shared and made discoverable so knowledge can evolve and lead to better outcomes for society.
Flawed research is retracted, but researchers don’t always know that a publication is no longer considered reliable.
In order to reduce new citations to retracted articles, the Bennett Institute for Applied Data Science(opens in new tab/window) is using Scopus citation data to create a service, the RetractoBot, to alert researchers that they’ve cited a retracted paper. They will be testing the impact of these notifications in an upcoming randomized trial.
Read more about the project protocol(opens in new tab/window).
The peer review process is often seen as lacking transparency. Does anonymous review help? Who is doing the majority of the work? Is there bias in the review process? We invite you to do research on our data. Elsevier's International Center for the Study of Research (ICSR) Peer Review Workbench(opens in new tab/window) is now available via the computational platform ICSR Lab.
The workbench offers a unique dataset to interested researchers who want to run research on journal evaluation and peer review processes.
See publications(opens in new tab/window) from this project.
Many journals require authors to submit a completed CONSORT(opens in new tab/window) guideline checklist upon submission of their randomized control trial (RCT) focused manuscript.
We’re working with the Columbia University Data Science Institute(opens in new tab/window) to investigate how best to support this process. Students at the institute are exploring a corpus of RCT methods sections submitted to The Lancet and their corresponding CONSORT elements in order to develop a multi-label classification model.
Researchers, institutions and funders want to improve transparency in conducting and reporting research. In collaboration with the University of Amsterdam, we are surveying the attitudes and practices of authors, editors and reviewers, and assessing how they might have changed since journals and organizations became signatories of the Transparency and Openness Promotion Committee standards.
Read more about the project(opens in new tab/window).
